Using a title "Process Engineer"

[nbog]

I am kind of confused about this:
My title in the company I work for is "Process Engineer" although the company nor the job description requires professional designation i.e. P. Eng (Canada, BC). Is it against the law if I use "Process Engineer" title on my business card? I don't have P. Eng. designation...

Thanks

 

[JLSeagull]

There are many threads on this topic. Consider a few searches.

Legal use of the title "engineer" varies by location. I am barely familiar with the requirements in Texas. They change the rules frequently. The requirements vary by state within the United States of America. I do not know the requirements in Canada or other international location.

Texas exempts some organizations such as the telephone companies.

Within Texas provisions exist for "graduate engineers".
§ 1001.406. Graduate Engineers
(a) A graduate of a university recognized by the American Association of Colleges and Universities who has a degree from an engineering program accredited by the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) has the right to:
(1) disclose any college degree received by the person; and
(2) use the term “graduate engineer” on the person’s stationery or business cards or in personal communications of any character.
(b) A graduate engineer who is employed in a firm registered under this chapter and who is working under the direct supervision of a licensed professional engineer may use the term “engineer” on the person’s stationery or business cards or in personal communications of any character.

SUBCHAPTER G. LICENSE REQUIREMENTS
§ 1001.301. License Required
(a) A person may not engage in the practice of engineering unless the person holds a license issued under this chapter.
(b) Except as provided by Subsection (f), a person may not, unless the person holds a license issued under this chapter, directly or indirectly
use or cause to be used as a professional, business, or commercial identification, title, name, representation, claim, asset, or means of advantage or benefit any of, or a variation or abbreviation of, the following terms:
(1) “engineer”;
(2) “professional engineer”;
(3) “licensed engineer”;
(4) “registered engineer”;
(5) “registered professional engineer”;
(6) “licensed professional engineer”; or
(7) “engineered.”

Buckle up and stay tuned.

 

[CJKruger]

nbog,

Yes, as far as I know it is against the law in Canada.

 

[mk2000]

I am in Australia and I will be most interested to know
What made the government regulate the engineering profession?
Since when did this happen, and
What was the reasoning behind it?

In Australia any Tom, Dick and Harry can be called an engineer. Security personnel are called "Crowd Control Engineers" which gives a twisted definition to the profession. However it is easier to be called an engineer as there are no legal restrictions for it however you need to be licensed to be able to practice security tasks. How this works I have no idea?

 

[moltenmetal]

mk2000: engineering in Canada was regulated as a profession at different times in different provinces. In Ontario it was officially regulated in the 1920s. A couple of bridges which failed with spectacular loss of life sealed the deal in the other provinces.

The profession was regulated for good reason: to protect the public. For the same reason that lawyers, doctors, chartered accountants etc. were licensed: because the public is in no position to judge the competence of an engineer, and must put blind faith in their ability. Engineering done wrong can be deadly. Judging the competence of an engineer is best done by other engineers.

The provincial Engineering Acts are interpreted to mean that a person who does not have a P.Eng. license is not permitted to use the word "engineer" in their job title in any way which may confuse the public as to their licensure status. However, enforcement is notoriously difficult- basically it relies on engineers seeing others' cards and ratting them out to the authorities. And nobody in the world can stop you from putting "B.A.Sc., mechanical engineering" on your card if you indeed posess such a degree- from a reputable institution or not...

To complicate matters, we're the mouse living next door to the elephant- the USA has extremely limited requirements for licensure in most states, and a general exemption from licensure for almost all engineers working in "industry". That puts an intolerable strain on the maintenance of a formal licensure system in Canada.

In the most populous province in Canada (Ontario), there is a narrow exception from licensure for people doing work of a non-structural nature for their employer on their employer's means of production. I.e. a toolmaker or millwright can do some limited engineering on a cheese packaging line for their own employer- but not for hire for other firms etc. However, this exception is widely misinterpreted, even by some staff at the regulatory body, to be a general exception from licensure for all engineers.

Similarly, we have a Certificate of Authorization program. All firms which advertise the fact that they do professional engineering require a C of A, even if the firm consists of one P.Eng. licensee and no employees. The C of A permits a firm to nominate a signatory licensed professional engineer (i.e. a patsy) to take professional responsibility for all the engineering done by the firm. In fact, this signatory in some cases doesn't even work for the company in question! This C of A system is widely abused, such that one P.Eng. may be put in a position by their employer of taking responsibility for the "engineering" done by large numbers of non-licensed engineers, non-engineers etc. that the firm hires. The only thing the signatory can do if they're not satisfied with the ethics of this particular situation ultimately is to quit the firm.

The fact of the matter remains that virtually nobody needs an engineering license to find engineering employment in Canada. The only person you have to convince of your abilities and credentials is your potential employer. Perhaps this explains why less than 20% of Canadian engineering grads bother to go on to engineering licensure these days. For most engineers, the P.Eng. license is a voluntary title rather than a real license which grants meaningful rights of licensure. Oh yeah- I forgot to mention that it grants you the right to sign, but not charge for, the passports of your friends and neighbours.

The main challenge to Canadian engineering licensure at current is the vast influx of engineering immigrants to Canada in recent years. Engineering immigration grew 12-fold between 1991 and 2001 and has stabilized at a level which amounts to 1.5x as many self-declared engineers immigrating to Canada yearly as we graduate from all of our accredited engineering universities combined. This huge surplus of engineering immigrants further complicates matters by settling primarily in three cities( 55% of the total in Toronto alone). Joblessness and under-employment result. Many in the immigrant community blame their situation on the licensure process, whereas the real problem is one of simple supply and demand.

 

[owg]

Thanks Moltenmetal, I was tempted to respond but you have done a very thorough job.

HAZOP at

http://www.curryhydrocarbons.ca

 

[JLSeagull]

mk2000
Texas had a disaster about 70 years ago related to a boiler explosion in a school house that killed a bunch of kids. This initiated professional engineering registration in Texas. However the rules changed in 1992. Those changes provide general revenue to the state.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_London_School_explosion

 

[JStephen]

I was just checking on Australia. As best I can tell from a quick look, there is an engineering registration process, but it seems the laws don't necessarily require it yet, either.

http://www.nerb.org.au/board/background.cfm

"The registers (NPER and NETR) are administered to safeguard the community, at no cost to government, with a particular emphasis on public safety and the risks associated with asymmetry of knowledge in an engineer-client relationship.

"Public safety is protected when only competent practitioners are registered and provide engineering services in critical areas. Registered practitioners will be engaged to provide services in such areas only if stipulated by regulation or demanded by the market."

 

[mk2000]

JStephen

The register is only regulated for civil engineers and specifically in building and construction industry. However there is no law stating who is qualified to be called an engineer. The rest is free for all.

Thanks for the reply.

 

[dcasto]

OK, thanks all, but can a person have the title in a private (not government) company of "Engineer" without haveing an Engineering Degree, past a test, or what ever in OK, TX, or Canada?

 

[JLSeagull]

Without a license in Texas the person cannot use the title engineer. The company can provide the title to someone such as Process Engineering Specialist, or Process Technical Professional but not Process Engineer. The title for someone with P.E. registration could be titled Process Engineer.

 

[moltenmetal]

dcasto: in the province of Ontario at least, it doesn't matter who your employer is- private, government, no matter: you cannot call yourself "process engineer" unless you have a license to practice professional engineering in that province.

You can, however, call yourself "B.A.Sc., chemical engineering", or put "engineering department" or the like on your card, and nobody at the provincial regulatory bodies can say anything about it- unless of course it's a lie. Then the employer will want to know about employees misrepresenting themselves since it has liability implications to the company.

A license is not required to actually WORK as a process engineer in Ontario, if a professional engineer under a Certificate of Authorization is willing to take responsibility for your work. Or perhaps if the licensee's employer puts them in the situation of being forced to take responsibility for your work... But the use of the TITLE "professional engineer", or anything which can be misconstrued to imply licensure (including project or process engineer etc.), is restricted to licensees ONLY and is punishable by fines.

 

[dtlb26]

Contact your local state or provincial engineering office and inquire to be sure. Canada has a nationwide agreement, and using the information for Manitoba below, I'm confident in stating that you cannot use the word engineer.

About 7 years ago, I was on a board for a provinical association that was going after microsoft to stop giving graduates of their training progam the title "Microsoft Engineer".

Here is some literature for the manitoba apegm.mb.ca

58(1) Except as otherwise provided in this Act, no person who is not a member or a temporary licensee shall use, orally or otherwise, any of the following titles:

(a)professional engineer;

(b)engineer;

(c)consulting engineer;

(d)professional geoscientist;

(e)geoscientist;

(f)consulting geoscientist;

or any similar designation or any suffix, prefix, word, title or designation, abbreviated or otherwise, implying that the person is a member, holder of a certificate of authorization, temporary licensee, specified scope of practice licensee, engineer-in-training or geoscientist-in-training, or is engaged in or entitled to engage in the practice of professional engineering or professional geoscience.

 

[djack77494]

Sorry, I don't usually like to be impertinent, but don't forget about the:
1) sanitation engineer (garbageman), and the
2) domestic engineer (housewife)
Also, please excuse my gender specific descriptions, but I'm not inclined to be politically correct.

 

[JLSeagull]

Train drivers and boiler operators are better examples. Taking Katy djack's comments up another notch, many technical people are called field engineer, commissioning engineer, startup engineer, etc. I worked an an offshore platform project with many British and Scottsmen where the title engineer appeared to be the next promotion over craft superviser.

There are a few driving forces behind the engineer "title" within the Americas. The first premise usually cited is to provide some assurance of competency regarding safe design. My spin is that some states (such as Texas with the decline in oil production) needed to increase tax revenue - without increasing taxes. Texas required engineering registration to use the title and jumped the annual license fee by about $200. So, it is partly about money, whether you are an engineer wanting more money for being registered or the state getting more money by requiring registration. : )

 

[JoeTank]

JLSeagull
Cool name. Regarding the increase of fees to increase revenues, I doubt very many states are getting much benefit from PE fees. I think most are now looking at PE fees as a means to simply pay for the costs off such programs.

Joe Tank

 

[moltenmetal]

In Canada I believe that the operating "engineers" or stationary "engineers" had certificates/licenses before we professional engineers did- because frankly they routinely killed more people than we did. So they get the nod and are permitted to call themselves "engineers", having been "grandfathered" into the applicable provincial Acts.

As to the use of inferential titles like putting "engineering department" on your card, those are difficult to do anything about. And there is no rule about non-technical people supervising engineers- ultimately it happens just about everywhere. The big boss is seldom a practicing engineer, regardless what education they received.

As to the protection offered to the public by virtue of a professional engineering license- that has to be considered in the light of the entire regulatory regime in the location in question. In Canada, we're more prone toward proactive public protection via government- or self-regulation such as the engineering license. In the US they focus more on "freedom", plus compensation of the victims through product liability- at rates so punitive and ridiculous that they're legendary. Personally, I get little comfort that my corpse is potentially worth millions to my wife and kids- I'd rather have someone at least ATTEMPTING to reduce the likelihood that I'm killed by the incompetence of others in the first place, and I'd greatly prefer that person to be society of engineers rather than some bean-counter or actuary working for an insurance company. But to each (nation) their own!