Man fined for criticizing govt using science, without a license

[grumpydoc]

Even trying to protect Doctor is difficult - anyone with a PhD can legitimately entitle themselves "Doctor". I believe that the current legally protected term in the UK is "Registered Medical Practitioner".

I seem to remember that in the UK it is strictly only PhDs who are allowed to call themselves Doctor, however common it may be for medical people to call themselves that.

No, it's OK for medical doctors to call themselves Doctor, quite a few will have doctorate level degrees anyway.

[EEVblog]

here engineer is not a protected title, anyone can call themselves engineer, though it generally means a Bsc or Msc in an engineering field.

Here is the rub:
The title engineer (or any other title for that matter) is a vocational title, and as such should reflect what your current vocation is, not what qualifications you hold.

Like someone said before, a freshly minted graduate who has not done a single days engineering work in their life (professional or otherwise) is not an engineer.
They have engineering qualifications, and can probably call themselves an "Engineer by qualification", or "Engineering graduate", but not "Engineer". Engineer implies a vocation to me, and I'd be pretty sure most people if they actually thought about it.

The Institute of Engineers Australia (IEA) seem to agree:
https://www.engineersaustralia.org.au/For-Individuals
You are a "Graduate Engineer" until you "level up" with vocational experience to be a "Professional Engineer" a.k.a simply "Engineer"
And IIRC, to get certified as a Professional Engineer with the IEA you have to prove substantial work experience, otherwise you forever remain a "Graduate Engineer" if all you have is that bit of paper.

Likewise someone who has a B.Eng and has worked for 30 years as *insert other unrelated profession here* is not an engineer.

I have formal qualifications in personal training/fitness instructing but I have never worked as one, so I don't go around saying I'm a personal trainer. That would misrepresent what I do / have done as a vocation.

At some point, regardless of your qualifications, to most people's interpretation of a vocational title you would become a "former engineer" or back to "qualified engineer" if you haven't worked in anything engineering related for *insert however many years here*.

And this is why it silly to say someone who doesn't have qualifications is not an engineer if they actually work as an engineer as a vocation. And more so if a company or peers have vetted and hired the and given them the vocational title of engineer.

[brucehoult]

Talking of red lights.

As a motorcyclist myself, I often get frustrated because my bike is too small for some traffic lights to detect. This means that I sometimes have to run a red, otherwise wait indefinitely because it will never turn green. I had to do this last night at some temporary lights. I'd been waiting there for over 5 minutes, there was nothing coming the other way and a queue of traffic was building up behind me. In the end I preceded with caution. When I got through the lights and checked my rear view mirror the other side was red too!

If you treat the red light with at least as much caution as you would a stop sign then you will be fine legally, at least in NZ. Certainly waiting more than one minute with no other vehicles in sight is quite unnecessary.

[james_s]

Talking of red lights.

As a motorcyclist myself, I often get frustrated because my bike is too small for some traffic lights to detect. This means that I sometimes have to run a red, otherwise wait indefinitely because it will never turn green. I had to do this last night at some temporary lights. I'd been waiting there for over 5 minutes, there was nothing coming the other way and a queue of traffic was building up behind me. In the end I preceded with caution. When I got through the lights and checked my rear view mirror the other side was red too!

I don't mind that, I've had to do it a few times myself when the system didn't detect my car for one reason or another. The thing that annoys me is when a light turns red and several more cars rush through, or in the case of the guy I knew who got hit, the car didn't bother to stop in the first place. As long as you stop first and carefully assess the situation, go ahead and go through if it's clear that nobody is coming and the light is probably malfunctioning.

[metrologist]

Here is the rub:
The title engineer (or any other title for that matter) is a vocational title, and as such should reflect what your current vocation is, not what qualifications you hold.

I wonder if you still consider yourself an Engineer? Maybe you are now an Actor? Producer and etc, because that's what you do. Maybe you still engineer something? Maybe you are engineering success

[Rick Law]

In the USA, wording of a degree diploma varies.  From web search, I found these examples: (… awarded the degree of: )
+ "Bachelor of Science [not a word about major]" (UC-Berkley),
+ "Bachelor of Science Electrical Engineering [no 'in' here, exactly as show]" (U of Colorado).
+ "Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering" (MIT),

So, it would imply to me the gentleman can legally sign with the title "Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering" but not the title "Electrical Engineer" even in the State he earned the degree.

This is not odd.  Most times I receive letters beginning with "Dear Sir,".   Should I found myself in England writing a complain letter to some government department, and I sign it as "Sir Rick Law"; it is likely I will get into some kind of trouble.  "Sir" has special/legal meaning in England, just as "Engineer" has special/legal meaning in Oregon.

Also, having the knowledge and/or a degree in a craft does not confer the legal right to practice that craft, nor does it confer rights to a title that is defined by the jurisdiction in question.

+ You can have the MD (medical doctor) degree, but until you are certified and licensed in that State, you cannot practice as doctor in medicine in that State.
+ You can have the law degree, but until you pass the Bar exam, you cannot practice law in that State.

So, for example take 1973/1974 Hillary Clinton in Washington DC.    Well, she was not a Clinton yet back in 1973/4, but that is irrelevant to the point here.  She has her JD degree from Yale but failed DC bar exam.   If she write a letter with legal suggestions, she can sign as "Rodham Clinton, JD" but if she sign as "Rodham Clinton, Attorney at Law", she could be in rather big legal trouble.  Bill Clinton on the other hand has the JD and passed the Arkansas bar exam.  He could practice law there up until the time of his disbarment - for lying under oath (2000/2001).

So, with this one, I think the government bureaucrats in Oregon are right.


^{Disclaimer – Law is just my last name and I am not a lawyer.  Further, I am not pretending to be an engineer, nor am I presenting this as legal advice.  However, I am trying to appear smart, insightful, thoughtful, and all those other good things.}

[josecamoessilva]

So, with this one, I think the government bureaucrats in Oregon are right.

I'm sure they're legally covered. Doesn't mean they're right.

[WA1ICI]

I've worked in electronics my whole career - starting off as a design engineer at Intel in 1977, and ending as a part-time consultant, with jobs designing custom LSI, high-speed communications, CPU hardware and much else, as well as management.  I've been a member of IEEE since 1978.  My college degree is "Master of Engineering" from Cornell Univ.  If I can't call myself an "engineer", what can I call myself?  An "actor faking being an engineer"?  "Someone doing engineering-like things"?

In all my work in Silicon Valley, I never once encountered the requirement for a Professional Engineer (PE) license.  If all the people in Silicon Valley who design electronics are not engineers, what are they?  I'll admit that there are plenty of incompetant engineers who shouldn't have been ones (I've had to fire a few), but most are good and some excellent.  I've even worked with several hardware and software engineers that were outstanding but didn't have relevant college degrees.

I can see the need for licensed engineers in areas where there is substantial financial, legal, or safety risks, but usually these have a particular title, such as "Professional Engineer", which probably should be protected by law.  But it seems like Oregon is a victim of "regulatory capture", in this case captured by the professional engineers and/or their unions.  They don't seem to realize that there are lots of people working in, say, Beaverton (Tektronix) or Hillsboro (Intel) that are doing things that are traditionally called "engineering".  Oregon picked the wrong word to legally protect. 

The root of the problem is that, in English, there isn't a convenient word for doing technical design without a license.  There are whole major fields (such as electronics) where licensing is simply absent, at least in the United States.  Usually the gateway requirement is a relevant college degree, but even here it is not always a necessity.

I hope Oregon loses its case, or at least tightens-down what words they are legally protecting.

- John Atwood

[james_s]

Even if they're legally covered, it's still stupid. I don't care if someone calls themselves a doctor as long as they're not actually practicing medicine without a license, and I certainly don't care if someone calls themselves an engineer without being a certified PE so long as they're not designing skyscrapers and bridges and stuff. This guy didn't even design something, he just pointed out that their numbers were wrong and the only thing they could throw at him is inappropriate use of the title. He never claimed to be a PE, just an electronics engineer.

I have mixed feelings about the whole thing anyway. I would never say that education or certifications are a bad thing, but throughout my career I have seen rather little correlation between those things and actual practical ability to apply the knowledge they have and do the job. Theory and book knowledge is great, but it takes a lot more than theory and book knowledge to be a good engineer, or any number of other career titles I'd assume.

[Richard Crowley]

Mr. Järlström simply didn't do very good research.  If he had, he would have discovered that he isn't the first to complain and present evidence about those cameras. Or even the 10th. And possibly not the 100th.  People have been complaining, whinging, presenting evidence, timing, publishing, ranting for DECADES about those things.  And the government (city and state) steadfastly ignore all petitions from their customers (us citizens).  And just for spite they throw the book at anyone they can.  Just to get rid of them.

Even if Järlström and the Institute for Justice win in court (which seems unlikely as the court is the same state government) it would make zero impact on the red-light cameras.  Quite to the contrary, other cities in Oregon are seeing $$$ and installing the same robot bandits.  The whole business about the title "Engineer" is a red herring here.  They could just as easily chosen some other excuse to shut him up and make him go away.  We aren't yet at the point where they can send out the SWAT team at 0400 and roust him out of bed and lock him up. But just give them a few years.

But, OTOH, if you crossed the border illegally to enter the USA and you are using a stolen Social Security Number and lied committed perjury about your status to get a job and a drivers license, you are safe in Beaverton because it is a "Sanctuary City".

[EEVblog]

Here is the rub:
The title engineer (or any other title for that matter) is a vocational title, and as such should reflect what your current vocation is, not what qualifications you hold.

I wonder if you still consider yourself an Engineer? Maybe you are now an Actor? Producer and etc, because that's what you do. Maybe you still engineer something? Maybe you are engineering success

My Vocation has changed somewhat (ok, a lot), but considering that I run an engineering Youtube channel and at least do a little engineering every day, I'm most certainly still an engineer.
Just like say someone who moved into engineering management would still be an engineer. They may not get their handy dirty every day, but they are still in the game.

[EEVblog]

I've worked in electronics my whole career - starting off as a design engineer at Intel in 1977, and ending as a part-time consultant, with jobs designing custom LSI, high-speed communications, CPU hardware and much else, as well as management.  I've been a member of IEEE since 1978.  My college degree is "Master of Engineering" from Cornell Univ.  If I can't call myself an "engineer", what can I call myself?  An "actor faking being an engineer"?  "Someone doing engineering-like things"?

In all my work in Silicon Valley, I never once encountered the requirement for a Professional Engineer (PE) license.  If all the people in Silicon Valley who design electronics are not engineers, what are they?

And that right there is what makes this whole thing an absolute joke, and anyone who tries to defend restriction on the simple vocational word "engineer" will never win.

I can see the need for licensed engineers in areas where there is substantial financial, legal, or safety risks, but usually these have a particular title, such as "Professional Engineer", which probably should be protected by law.  But it seems like Oregon is a victim of "regulatory capture", in this case captured by the professional engineers and/or their unions.  They don't seem to realize that there are lots of people working in, say, Beaverton (Tektronix) or Hillsboro (Intel) that are doing things that are traditionally called "engineering".  Oregon picked the wrong word to legally protect.

Yes. By all means invent and protect some specific term like PEng or whatever, and let market forces dictate whether it's required or not.
e.g. The IEA failed with CPeng in Australia for the electrical/electronics field, hardly anyone has it, and it's almost never a requirement for anything, and gains you essentially nothing by having it on your resume.

And in cases where major public safety etc is involved I even support having it as a strict legal requirement.

[mtdoc]

Even trying to protect Doctor is difficult - anyone with a PhD can legitimately entitle themselves "Doctor". I believe that the current legally protected term in the UK is "Registered Medical Practitioner".

I seem to remember that in the UK it is strictly only PhDs who are allowed to call themselves Doctor, however common it may be for medical people to call themselves that.

No, it's OK for medical doctors to call themselves Doctor, quite a few will have doctorate level degrees anyway.

FWIW - In the USA, the title "doctor" has very little to do with whether one is licensed or qualified to practice medicine. In addition to medical doctors, PhDs, podiatrists, dentists, chiropractors and others can legally call themselves doctor.

In order to legally practice medicine, one needs to be licensed by a state medical board.  They require proof of passing passing a series of national medical board exams (which require graduation from a medical school to take).  It also requires completions of at least one year of a medical internship.  (It has nothing to do with the AMA which many, many doctors do not belong to. The AMA is really just a medical lobbying association. It's an out of date organization - and I don't know any doctors that have paid the fees they charge to join)

After internship, in order to be a "board certified" physician - which almost all US physicians are, one must complete a medical residency training program and then pass a series of board certification exams administered by the appropriate medical specialty board.

Medical specialty boards require regular continuing medical education and exams every 7-10 years to maintain board certification which is required for most jobs.

[CatalinaWOW]

In the USA, wording of a degree diploma varies.  From web search, I found these examples: (… awarded the degree of: )
+ "Bachelor of Science [not a word about major]" (UC-Berkley),
+ "Bachelor of Science Electrical Engineering [no 'in' here, exactly as show]" (U of Colorado).
+ "Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering" (MIT),

So, it would imply to me the gentleman can legally sign with the title "Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering" but not the title "Electrical Engineer" even in the State he earned the degree.

This is not odd.  Most times I receive letters beginning with "Dear Sir,".   Should I found myself in England writing a complain letter to some government department, and I sign it as "Sir Rick Law"; it is likely I will get into some kind of trouble.  "Sir" has special/legal meaning in England, just as "Engineer" has special/legal meaning in Oregon.

Also, having the knowledge and/or a degree in a craft does not confer the legal right to practice that craft, nor does it confer rights to a title that is defined by the jurisdiction in question.

+ You can have the MD (medical doctor) degree, but until you are certified and licensed in that State, you cannot practice as doctor in medicine in that State.
+ You can have the law degree, but until you pass the Bar exam, you cannot practice law in that State.

So, for example take 1973/1974 Hillary Clinton in Washington DC.    Well, she was not a Clinton yet back in 1973/4, but that is irrelevant to the point here.  She has her JD degree from Yale but failed DC bar exam.   If she write a letter with legal suggestions, she can sign as "Rodham Clinton, JD" but if she sign as "Rodham Clinton, Attorney at Law", she could be in rather big legal trouble.  Bill Clinton on the other hand has the JD and passed the Arkansas bar exam.  He could practice law there up until the time of his disbarment - for lying under oath (2000/2001).

So, with this one, I think the government bureaucrats in Oregon are right.


^{Disclaimer – Law is just my last name and I am not a lawyer.  Further, I am not pretending to be an engineer, nor am I presenting this as legal advice.  However, I am trying to appear smart, insightful, thoughtful, and all those other good things.}

There is even more confusion in degree names than that.  As another example, the degrees I received from my school are:

Bachelor of Arts in Electrical Engineering.
Master of Electrical Engineering.

I am not a lawyer either, but everything I have seen about the law says detail matters.

The Oregon gentleman signed his letter as an engineer, not as a "Registered Professional Engineer", or with the abbreviation PE.  Nor did he affix the seal which is issued in most states to Registered Professional Engineers, or any facsimile of this seal.   I think most of us agree he is not entitled to the latter description, but he didn't claim it so there should not be a problem.  I suspect if he gets an Attorney (not a JD degree holder) with appropriate legal background he will be quite successful in defending himself.  Of course the Attorney will cost more than the $500 fine.

[SkyMaster]

Where I live, the title "Engineer" is a reserved title.

In order to use this title you have to be a member of the "Ordre des ingénieurs du Québec" (commonly known as "OIQ"). This is part of the laws http://legisquebec.gouv.qc.ca/en/ShowDoc/cs/I-9

It has nothing to do with the type of engineering somebody is doing, or if the person is getting paid or not.

The OIQ is known to come down on individual who use the title "Engineer" illegally.


I think the only persons who can use the word "engineer" in their title are the "forest engineer", and they have to call themselves "forest engineer" and not "engineer".


 

[josecamoessilva]

And that right there is what makes this whole thing an absolute joke, and anyone who tries to defend restriction on the simple vocational word "engineer" will never win.

The problem, as the history of the AMA and the ABA shows, is that first they came for the name, then they start creating restrictions, all in the name of "clarity" or "protection of the public" and eventually you get to a situation where fully-informed transactions are illegal.

Imagine that an hypothetical American Engineering Association existed with the powers of the AMA.  A non-member, Dave, possibly with a degree in EECS but not necessarily, with a long history of building electronic devices for himself and tearing down devices on YouTube, is hired by TinyStartupDotCom to help them with some circuit design. Dave discloses that he's not in the AEA, which doesn't matter to TinyStartupDotCom, so they agree to a schedule of deliverables and payments.

Meanwhile, a very outdated and incompetent engineer, Bill, who's a member of the AEA learns that he didn't get the job (due to incompetence) but a non-AEA member did. Bill tattles, Dave is fined, forbidden from selling his services even to fully informed customers, and has his breadboards confiscated, and TinyStartupDotCom has to hire Bill and his incompetence.

That's the real problem with professional organizations with legal binding power. No matter how well-meaning they start out, history (of the ABA and AMA) suggests they tend to be rent-seeking guilds protecting their members against the competition of the potentially better and cheaper outsiders.

Oh the stories I could tell...

(By the way, there's an AEA, American Economic Association, but it's like the IEEE, ACM, and AAAS, a productive not a restrictive association. Inasmuch as economists can be productive  )

[Tom45]

I hadn't realized that the Institute For Justice had got involved with this until Richard Crowley mentioned it.

See: http://ij.org/case/oregon-engineering-speech/

There they list a number of other examples of overreach by the Oregon State Board of Examiners for Engineering and Land Surveying.

Given IJ's record of success in many occupational licensing cases across the country over the years, I wouldn't want to bet against them in this case.

[Rick Law]

I hadn't realized that the Institute For Justice had got involved with this until Richard Crowley mentioned it.

See: http://ij.org/case/oregon-engineering-speech/

There they list a number of other examples of overreach by the Oregon State Board of Examiners for Engineering and Land Surveying.

Given IJ's record of success in many occupational licensing cases across the country over the years, I wouldn't want to bet against them in this case.

Oregon being one of the more liberal jurisdictions, I would have imagined they would be more open with how people behave.  I recall this story:

"The Portland Police Bureau recommends that all riders at least wear a helmet and shoes to avoid any potential injuries. Being naked in public in Portland is legal if it falls within the guidelines of ORS 163.465" - From a Portland Police Bureau press release
_{(reference:https://bikeportland.org/2011/06/17/police-bureau-releases-statement-on-legality-of-naked-bike-ride-55056)}

ORS is Oregon State wide, so it not just a city ordinance applying only to Portland.

Whatever is your stand on legally reserving the word "engineer", this is really schizophrenic behavior of the government bureaucrats in Oregon.  You are so free you run around naked in Oregon, yet you can't call yourself engineer.

That, in my view, shows how government bureaucrats always run wild.  After a few weeks in government, the government bureaucrats begin to think they are Gods.  Teachers led student singing songs of the praise while alive, and after they died, they get temples (train stations, airports, high schools) named after them.

[james_s]

Liberal or conservative is a matter of perspective. My observation has been that it's more about which aspects of other people's lives one fixates on rather than the amount of fixation.

[retrolefty]

The root of the problem is that, in English, there isn't a convenient word for doing technical design without a license.  There are whole major fields (such as electronics) where licensing is simply absent, at least in the United States.  Usually the gateway requirement is a relevant college degree, but even here it is not always a necessity.

 In California worked some with a PE listed engineer at the refinery I worked at that didn't have a college/university degree in any engineering course. He was 'let in' using a 'grandfather' clause that allowed prior work experience and support of his employee to 'get the stamp'. I don't think that
clause is still applicable but I don't really know for sure.

[vodka]

When I graduated EECS (circa the Paleozoic), I got a letter from the Portuguese "order of engineers" telling me about all the great things they would do for me and all the things I couldn't do without joining. They wanted more in yearly dues than the IEEE, ACM, and AAAI put together (all of which I was a member of), so I never replied.

One time some representatives of the order were visiting our school for some even day and on a panel discussion one said that "some of your professors aren't real engineers" (because not members of the order) to which I grabbed a mic and asked a few basic EECS questions. The kind that students knew the answer to.

I'll let you guess what happened. 

Diplomacy, never my forte.

The  "Order of enginers" are seemed to the our "Profesional colleges" but more aggavated due to the  17 kingdom of Taifas with their respective provinces  besides faced among them(inclusive on the same province with other profesional college).

For example, The Engineer technical  industrial college and  Agronomist college terminated on the court for deciding who of the two colleges had the competence for designing the structure building of the a farm.

Here according to Plutocrats or Caste for can to work,you must to sign to college and pay the "PIZZO" monthly or semmiannual. But done the law , done the cheat ,there are many engineering that work without signing projects. When they have to sign the project,there are two options: Sign to college ,pay the pizzo and enter to secta(*) or his boss or companion sign his project.

*secta:Once time that you sign with a professional college , you never never never can sign off or delete, only cease the activity during some time .
             And if you want to work other time, you must to pay the revolutionary tax for the years without working plus the corresponding fee.

[AndyC_772]

The story has made The Register now:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/04/29/engineer_fined_for_talking_about_math/

[CatalinaWOW]

Part of my response to this was to investigate becoming registered in Oregon.  I had not paid serious attention to the process for nearly four decades since I passed the EIT and then became too busy with family and career to finish the PE license.

First, relative to many of the comments, there is an exam specifically for Software Engineers and one for Electronics Engineers.  Not like when I last looked and those two disciplines were the red headed step children of Electrical Engineering.

In the US many, maybe all, states have normalized on exams performed by a national organization NCEES.  Didn't look too closely into it, but they appear to be a commercial test service.  Tests are given a couple of times a year, and cost $225.  It is a day long, open book test.  Lots of rules which are the obvious bureaucratic response to specific attempts to gain advantage in the past.  Some seem silly.  I would have to buy a new calculator since none of the many I have is on the approved list.  Slide rules are specifically outlawed .  When I took the EIT I brought my slide rule as backup in case of battery failure.  Not an option now. 

If I pass the test (not really worried, I will do some review study) there would be another couple hundred dollars registration fee, followed by a re-up fee every couple of years.  I saw no evidence of a requirement for training to stay up to date. 

One interesting fact.  Only about three quarters of the board controlling registration in Oregon are registered professional engineers.  Apparently you need higher qualifications to perform engineering that to oversee the quality of that performance.

[james_s]

Why on earth would they not let you use a slide rule? Not a whole lot of people left who even know how to use one in the first place.

[Tom45]

Why on earth would they not let you use a slide rule? Not a whole lot of people left who even know how to use one in the first place.

They should give extra credit for people that use a slide rule.