Hacker News Reader

That’s how we got to where we are today. You don’t get to call yourself a doctor or nurse because you have a box of band-aids in your pocket.

The meaning of engineering on the other hand has been watered down to be meaningless. There are no professional standards and no control on what companies represent their staff to be. It sounds prestigious as a title, but that’s about the end of it.

> The meaning of engineering has been watered down to be meaningless

For some disciplines like Software Engineering, I agree.

For other disciplines like Civil engineering, the term has not been watered down. No company would hire someone to certify designs who was not a P. Eng because they are required to employ a P.Eng for this by regulations/law.

This problem has come up because the government/PEO has not reacted to the changing engineering landscape and don't require positions like "Software Engineer" to be filled by an actual P. Eng.

Companies made the title worthless. I don't see how it's fair to fault the person in the position because there is a double standard applied to individuals and companies regarding the term "Engineer"

Apply the standard both ways. People cannot call themselves an "Engineer" unless they hold a P.Eng and companies cannot hire anyone but a P.Eng for an "X Engineer" position.

> to my knowledge there are no legal restrictions on what title a company can give a role

From [1]: Becoming licensed gives you the right to use “P.Eng.” after your name and “engineer” in your job title. Under the Professional Engineers Act, you may only use “engineer” in your job title if you hold a P.Eng. licence.

So yes, I'd agree that companies shouldn't be using engineer in the job title unless they're hiring a P.Eng, but that doesn't absolve the employee of liability.

[1]http://www.peo.on.ca/index.php?ci_id=2075&la_id=1#whypeng

> So yes, I'd agree that companies shouldn't be using engineer in the job title unless they're hiring a P.Eng, but that doesn't absolve the employee of liability.

So, would you agree that if we are going to be strict about who can use the term "Engineer" there shouldn't be a double standard allowing companies to call a position "X Engineer" and then hire someone who isn't a P. Eng for the position?

If Engineer is a restricted term for individuals, then it should be a restricted term for employers as well. Employers having a position with "Engineer" in the title should only be permitted to hire people with a P.Eng.

> Under the Professional Engineers Act, you may only use “engineer” in your job title if you hold a P.Eng. licence.

The company sets the job title. So if they want to hire someone who isn't a P.Eng to the role, that person is supposed to tell the company to change the role title to exclude the term "Engineer" ?

Yes, I thought my agreement was clear in my previous comment. Companies shouldn't be using 'engineer' in the job title unless they're hiring a P.Eng.

TIL I can say "I work as an attorney at X company" even if I never went to law school, as long as that's my job title. Hint: I can't.