Engineer_abroad

After reading the various court transcripts provided I do agree that it is only in relation to disciplines specifically mentioned in the act.

However for completeness the definition is below and includes more than civil/mechanical.

practice of professional engineering” means the carrying on of chemical, civil, electrical, forest, geological, mechanical, metallurgical, mining or structural engineering, and other disciplines of engineering that may be designated by the council and for which university engineering programs have been accredited by the Canadian Engineering Accreditation Board or by a body which, in the opinion of the council, is its equivalent, and includes reporting on, designing, or directing the construction of any works that require for their design, or the supervision of their construction, or the supervision of their maintenance, such experience and technical knowledge as are required by or under this Act for the admission by examination to membership in the association, and, without limitation, includes reporting on, designing or directing the construction of public utilities, industrial works, railways, bridges, highways, canals, harbour works, river improvements, lighthouses, wet docks, dry docks, floating docks, launch ways, marine ways, steam engines, turbines, pumps, internal combustion engines, airships and airplanes, electrical machinery and apparatus, chemical operations, machinery, and works for the development, transmission or application of power, light and heat, grain elevators, municipal works, irrigation works, sewage disposal works, drainage works, incinerators, hydraulic works, and all other engineering works, and all buildings necessary to the proper housing, installation and operation of the engineering works embraced in this definition.

The section in bold is interesting as this could be seen to include any discipline on the following list:
https://engineerscanada.ca/accredita...by-institution

This includes for instance 'Computer Engineering' and the French version of IT Engineering "Génie des technologies de l'information'. Indeed Ordre des ingénieurs du Québec has won court cases against Microsoft on the use of term engineer. Specifically in this case it was the title 'Microsoft Certified System Engineer'

Note in the first case given above as transcripts
https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/do...resultIndex=25
The injunction was awarded as the defendant was using a title falling under 'Electrical Engineering' without registration. The defendant had never been registered with APEGBC or anywhere else.

In addition the OP in the original post was asking about telecommunications engineer not IT engineer. Telecommunications can be viewed as a sub-discipline of electrical engineering (specifically stated in the act) and Computer Engineering (which could be defined by bold section above). As such it is entirely possible that use of the title telecommunications engineer could be seen as failing under the defined disciplines in the act.

dave_j

I have to say that I've never been bothered that others have chosen to call themselves 'engineer'. It has always been my experience that those who need to know can quite easily discriminate.

I completely undersand why some might get upset but it's not really an argument worth having.

Paul_Shepherd

Bit of a storm in a tea cup.... I think an individual and the company they work for, know if they are an engineer or not. Its just a word used to describe a job.

Engineer_abroad

Just to clarify that I actually don't care who calls themselves what. I just want them to do so with an understanding of the difficulties of doing so given the regulatory environment in Canada.

Paul_Shepherd

That's a fair point. A Mechanical Engineer in Canada is a regulated profession, wheras a technologist for example is not.

I don't know of such a regulatory system in the UK.

dave2003

My first job (grad. eng) was in 1972. Many of the P.Engs were British. The dept. manager(P.Eng) to whom I reported qualified using his HNC certificate.

An electrical engineer (B.Sc. Eng) of my acquaintance, not a "joiner" as he described himself, was taken to court for signing off himself as the project engineer during correspondence. This guy turned up in court and successfully defended himself as free to call himself the project engineer, which indeed he was.

A friend owned a tool, die and special purpose machine shop employing no P.Engs. Somehow the provincial P.Eng body got hold of some of his company correspondence and machine drawings and decided to prosecute him. He never described himself as an engineer of any description-he was the chief designer. Case tossed out of court.

More recently there was a move afoot by some I.T jobsworth to create a chartered provincial body regulating the industry-it failed, after so many expressed fear of over-regulation, stifling bureaucracy, and suppression of creativity.

I'm in England now, and the telephone installer at my new home was described by B.T as a Telephone Engineer. Who cares?

Jingsamichty

Agree, who cares? The only people who care about what engineers are called are engineers. Everyone who knows anything about engineering knows what an engineer is and what an engineer isn't.

The rest of the majority of the population, who don't really understand what engineering is, think that anything technical involves engineers of different levels of braininess.

And the sun still rises each day...

dbd33

There was a discussion here, in the software engineering department, recently about the way in which "engineer" as a term has been degraded. Time was people would expect an engineer to be able to build a bridge using only a slide rule or operate a locomotive. Now everyone's called an engineer even if all they do is type. We wondered if we, uneducated rote labourers, few of us literate in the language of the country in which we live, and, yet, at the same time, highly paid "engineers", were responsible for the decline in status of the term.

Jingsamichty

Engineers don't help themselves though. Most engineers in my industry don't appreciate the difference between an engineering project and a construction project, they are quite happy to take the glory of great constructors.

Shakyuk

There's quite a bit of unwarranted hostility towards Engineer_Abroad in this thread.

I'd say the only people who care about what engineers are called are engineers, and those who have been injured or had loved ones killed by people who called themselves engineers but actually were not qualified to do the job.

In Canada people seem to respect the profession, in the UK a lot of people thought I wore overalls and either fixed cars or other mechanical things. That's because I've seen ridiculous titles like 'production engineer' to describe production line workers and 'heating engineer' for a plumber.

I've worked with enough 'engineers' stealing a living to know some form of protection for the title is a good idea. We seem to have no problems protecting lawyers or doctors but in most cases the outcomes of their ineptitude will result in a single death/ruined life. There's countless examples of engineers working in an unregulated environment killing hundreds and in some cases thousands and causing huge damage to the environment. When a mistake is so costly, I think it's worth making sure the person responsible is up to the task.

Almost Canadian

I don't believe that my advice has ever resulted in the death of anyone. I accept that it is possible that someone may have believed their life was ruined after receiving one of my invoices but, if that happened, I was not informed about it.

Engineer_abroad

Just to add that the reason why Canada adopted a regulated engineering model in the first place was as a result of the Quebec bridge collapse in 1907.

http://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&...HclCyWdwpUpdpq

Video versions also available on youtube for those interested, just look up Quebec bridge disaster.

dave_j

I've often considered a comparison of consequences between design engineering and some other professions.

If I made a mistake then there'd be an expensive piece of equipment somewhere that someone had actually built and if it didn't work then no amount of wishful thinking would make it go away. It's why there are checking systems in place and checks to check the checker. I remember that I used to be really pleased if anyone uncovered one of my mistakes and I was rigorous, almost demonic, in checking others.

I hadn't heard of the Quebec disaster before and Quebec Bridge Disaster - The Canadian Encyclopedia is a short description of the collapse for anyone interested.

jerryhung

Me to OH: All the nice people in BE are getting really angry about the word engineer!

Shakyuk

I've heard you aren't a real lawyer until your invoice causes someone to contemplate suicide...