Just off the top of my head, I figure that, given the price of training materials and certification fees, and especially the collateral sales that accrue from the MCSE program, MS could pay a $1000 fine for each of the 35,000 persons whom it has certified in Canada, and still not lose money on the deal.
I am a bit surprised that the OIQ was satisfied with the outcome. It does not even amount to a slap on the wrist. It might have made a larger statement if Microsoft had to pay for the court costs as well. While I do not know the Canadian legal structure, I do wonder if Microsoft can appeal to yet a higher court or what would happen if they still ignored the ruling.
If I was a quebeckian, I'd write my representative telling them what a waste of time, and (tax) money, over something so trite as a title. Honestly, this isn't Hollywood.
Wes C.
------------------------------ In this house, we OBEY the laws of thermodynamics! - Homer Simpson
And I'd be writing to increase the fines imposed on multinationals caught breaking the laws and encouraging others to do so. I earned my title, and it took a bit more time and money than what these "network engineers" went through. It's also a matter of consumer protection. We don't allow any one with a piece of paper from a diploma mill to hang a shingle as a medical doctor or lawyer. We should allow them to be engineers?
This same story has played out in Texas as well with not only Microsoft, but lots of companies. Where you are heading to is one of the most portective states in regaurds to licensing. Be careful what you call yourself in your new state until you get that license.
Honestly, I have no intention. I believe that after 10 years (and never having worked a day under a "liscensed engineer), it has become a venture not worth my time persuing. As a matter of fact, I have a good number of friends in Texas in the aerospace industry and they do just fine calling themselved engineers w/o a piece of paper that says they can. I am not a believer in the kind of protection that a state could offer me regarding a title. I feel not particular need to be called an engineer. And if I were to be sued, and lost, I would feel no less shame in calling myself a designer. I will still engineer.
Wes C.
------------------------------ In this house, we OBEY the laws of thermodynamics! - Homer Simpson
Texas hit the companies with a $3000 per day per "engineer" fine in either 2002 or 2003. The only "Exempt" industry they had the last time I checked was Telecommunications. All other industries are playing with fire unless the company has a Certificate of Authorization.
Microsoft will have larger fines and the individual MSCE’s will also be open to fines under this ruling.
The issue is not the $1,000 fine but the establishment that the law is the law and that a US company cannot flout Canadian law in Canada.
The engineering acts here are generally clear. The usage of the term ‘engineer’ is protected to those who are members of the provincial professional engineering association.
I'm in the USA and I don't think that Microsoft should have the right to refer to their employees as "engineers" unless they are real engineers. It seems to me that they are in reality programmers and technicians. Misuse of the title "engineer" is detrimental to the engineering profession. These "MCSE" folks are constantly exposed to the public and are not at their office hidden from the general public. They are therefore operating outside of "exempt" requirements and should therefore meet the legal requirements of the "engineer" title. The fine should have been much higher.
