Comment by yurisagalov | Hacker News Reader

Comment by yurisagalov | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

I actually don't think that's strictly true. Although there might be a stigma associated with calling yourself an Engineer if you didn't go through an Engineering program, it is only illegal to call yourself a Professional Engineer if you're not properly licensed.

Graduating from an Engineering degree (and/or receiving an Iron Ring) has no real legal protection or obligation. The licensing requirements to become a Professional Engineer (or P. Eng) are as follows:

  * Graduate with a degree from an accredited program in engineering or applied science, accredited by the Canadian Engineering Accreditation Board (CEAB).
  * Complete an Engineer in Training or "Engineering Internship" program under the direction of a P.Eng. (This is a minimum four-year program with the exception of Quebec)
  * Review of work experience by the Association,
  * Pass a Professional Practice Exam(content and format of which differs by province).

source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_and_licensure_in_en...

edit: based on the "Title Usage: Canada" section in the same article, it does look like there were lawsuits and attempts to try and restrict the usage of the word Engineer, but it seems results were mixed at best, and vary widely from province to province, so I'll stand by my point that the only actual protected term is Professional Engineer

Calling yourself a P.Eng without actually being a licensed P.Eng is very, very illegal.

Calling yourself an Engineer without having graduated from a CEAB-accredited institution is also illegal, just that people don't care nearly as much as bout this. You will occasionally see job postings and titles for "software engineers" from companies that don't know about this particular legal snag, and for the most part it's not policed.

You will sometimes see this dodged as "Engineering". "Junior Engineering" is a common moniker for someone who hasn't graduated yet, for example. The verb isn't protected, only the noun is.

As a licensed Professional Engineer I worry about the state of engineering in the US. I feel the word "engineer" is diluted to mean any job that requires technical know-how. Yet there are important ethical considerations if one practices as an engineer. I wish the true engineering professions could have the "Engineer" title differentiated from these other technical professions but it looks like it won't happen anytime soon, if ever. For instance you couldn't practice law or medicine without specific accreditation but for some reason engineering is not differentiated. Sure you can't design a bridge unless you are an accredited Professional Engineer. But the engineer with that title is not differentiated in the marketplace unless the organization knows it.

For those of us who are not Engineers, can you elaborate (or point us to more info) on the Important Ethical Considerations? I've always struggled to explain why programming is not engineering.

As a programmer who was once an engineer by trade, I would say the difference is that engineering implies manipulation of the pysical sciences, where programming is just logic.

"Just logic" I think really underplays things. That logic ends up in flight control systems, valve control for oil rigs, power grid management, robotics, factory automation, satellites, etc. A lot of software programming has very physical implications.

Typically there's a subtle difference in courses taken.

For example - at my school Comp Sci were allowed to take physics for physics majors instead of physics for engineers. For both electromagnetic physics and mechanical physics. Typically most engineers are required to take some courses in the some basic courses, ie Dynamics, Statics, and others depending on your major. This all assumes that your ABET accredited. Maybe it's because I don't see an accrediting agency/society. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ABET#Members

Good question. The Engineering profession holds certain code of ethics for the public at large. For instance when you step into a high-rise building, board a cruise ship, or travel across highways they are required to have rigorous testing and design protocol to ensure public safety. I believe NSPE says it best http://www.nspe.org/Ethics/CodeofEthics/index.html

"Offence, use of term “professional engineer”, etc.

(2) Every person who is not a holder of a licence or a temporary licence and who,

(a) uses the title “professional engineer” or “ingénieur” or an abbreviation or variation thereof as an occupational or business designation;

(a.1) uses the title “engineer” or an abbreviation of that title in a manner that will lead to the belief that the person may engage in the practice of professional engineering;

(b) uses a term, title or description that will lead to the belief that the person may engage in the practice of professional engineering; or

(c) uses a seal that will lead to the belief that the person is a professional engineer,

is guilty of an offence..."

As can be plainly seen, it is perfectly legal to call yourself a software engineer, audio engineer, sanitation engineer, or any other term which isn't holding yourself out to be a licensed professional engineer. The fine is $10,000.

Sort of - the CEAB has in recent years expanded its definition of professional engineering into software engineering also. There are now CEAB-accredited software engineering degrees.

An audio or sanitation engineer is unlikely to run afoul of this, a software engineer is less clear... I've yet to hear of anyone going after software engineers for the term though.

The results may be "mixed," but it does happen. MCSE was renamed in Canada, thanks to the Quebec case as well as intense pressure from Professional Engineering associations across Canada.

Source: My dad has served on local APEGGA boards and holds P.Eng and FEC designations.

I think it's one of those things in Canada where nothing happens until a complaint has been filed. Having said that, even though my job title is "Platform Engineer," as somebody with a CS degree living in Canada, I avoid using it when I'm away from the web, lest it prompt somebody to complain against my employer.

MCSE was renamed in Canada, thanks to the Quebec case as well as intense pressure from Professional Engineering associations across Canada.

I addressed this in another post, but this is not true. Microsoft temporarily advised holders to use the abbreviation instead of the full name, but then reverted to the full name (see my other post on this for a story on this from the PEO themselves). Years later they changed the whole program to "IT Professional" worldwide in a new marketing push to split the development track from the administration track.

I think it's one of those things in Canada where nothing happens until a complaint has been filed.

The Professional Engineering groups have absolutely no success in trying to coopt the dictionary, nor should they.

In Quebec, the title is simply "Engineer". Upon finishing an accredited program, the ring is delivered in a ceremony. After graduation and deliverance of the diploma, one can register with the professional order and call himself "Junior Engineer". This gives the right to practice engineering under supervision by an Engineer for a minimum period of 2 years (3 years min. without supervision). Before requesting the right to use the "Engineer" title, you have to pass an exam, mostly on deontological ethics.

There is currently no widespread recognition of the profession in the IT community. We almost never see any job posting requiring the title, or any company giving additional compensation/responsabilities because of the title. For this reason, very few software/IT engineers are going through the process as it is quite costly (~400$ per year + cash spent on minimum Continuing Education Units).

> There is currently no widespread recognition of the profession in the IT community. We almost never see any job posting requiring the title, or any company giving additional compensation/responsabilities because of the title.

The main difference between a comp sci. degree and a software eng. degree when I graduated in Quebec (circa 2007) was mostly courses about rational rose and the waterfall process. Software Engineer is a nice title and all, but I don't see its advantages over a comp sci. degree.

This is not true and you know it.

That is what my friends in Software Engineering reported. What do they actually learn?

In regards to Rational Rose, maybe you're friends missed the point that they learned software analysis and design, and that instead of waterfall process, they learned software development methodologies. At least, that is what I learned from SE.

But I must admit I haven't studied the curriculum of a CS program. Am I wrong to say you can do it in 3 years while SE is 4 years? If we could study a few programs from a few university offerings, I'm sure we could see what is different. I ought to think it is generally an engineering approach to building software, that is a mix of science, people and integrity.

I had a very good mix of science in CEGEP that, say, a software engineer from ETS completely missed.

I think that a lot of what you learn in the SE curriculum can be learnt (and probably is better learnt) on the job, as opposed to the very theoretical courses in a CS curriculum that a) cannot be learnt easily by one's self or on the job and b) will last a lifetime.

In 2006-7, it would have been much more useful nowadays for someone to learn about machine learning in an AI class than about rational rose and the waterfall process, and I suspect the same applies now in the CS vs SE debate, except with updated technologies.

You obvisouly don't know what is taught in SE. Let's take McGill as an example (from http://www.cs.mcgill.ca/academic/undergrad/programs/science-...)

CS: This program is the standard Major program offered by the School of Computer Science. It provides a broad introduction to the principles of computer science and offers ample opportunity to acquire in-depth knowledge of several sub-disciplines. At the same time, its credit requirements allow students to take an additional minor.

SE: This program provides a broad introduction to the principles of computer science and covers in depth the design and development of software systems.

For example, I recall that my SE program had some common courses with other engineering branches (ethics and technology, entrepreneurship, communication, finances for project manager), which were common to all engineering disciplines.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com