# Calling yourself an engineer without a PE



## Panchito (Jan 23, 2019)

This case was highlighted in the last edition of the IEEE publication The Institute:

http://theinstitute.ieee.org/ieee-roundup/blogs/blog/us-judge-rules-mats-jrlstrms-first-amendment-rights-were-infringed


----------



## bwin12 (Jan 24, 2019)

I read a different article about this subject a few months ago. I think it was Vice News (citation noted).

_"Järlström told The Institute, “This case has always been about more than just me, and I’m thrilled that the court has put a stop to some of the engineering board’s worst abuses. Being an engineer is a big part of my identity, as it is for many people. Thousands of Oregonians are engineers—even though we have no reason to be licensed as professional engineers—and we are now free to use the word engineer to describe ourselves.”"_

We (engineering school graduates) have always had the ability to identify as an engineer. My first job title was "Field Engineer", half the members of EB were probably a "Staff Engineer". When you represent yourself in a traffic court argument as an engineer you are implying implicit knowledge. He has no more knowledge about traffic patterns and light timing than any other person out there. If I remember correctly his wife or friend got busted by a red light camera. He came in as an "expert witness" and represented himself as an engineer. That's BS in my opinion.

I will say, Oregon backed down; maybe there is other info out there, I'm misinformed or they just didn't want to argue anymore.


----------



## txjennah PE (Jan 24, 2019)

bwin12 said:


> I read a different article about this subject a few months ago. I think it was Vice News (citation noted).
> 
> _"Järlström told The Institute, “This case has always been about more than just me, and I’m thrilled that the court has put a stop to some of the engineering board’s worst abuses. Being an engineer is a big part of my identity, as it is for many people. Thousands of Oregonians are engineers—even though we have no reason to be licensed as professional engineers—and we are now free to use the word engineer to describe ourselves.”"_
> 
> ...


Yeah, agreed. Our job titles identify us as engineers regardless of whether we have the license.  But to imply that he has knowledge of a certain area when he practices in a completely different subject is pretty shady.  I don't get it! I have plenty of people who assume I know XYZ just because I'm an engineer, and I'll have to tell them, "not that kind of engineer!"


----------



## Jbone27 PE (Jan 24, 2019)

Stuff like this is just a little annoying to me coming from the heart of oilfield country. Everyone is an "engineer" in the oilfield no matter what they actually do. 

I know I'm probably being Petty Mayonnaise on this but still bugs me.


----------



## RBHeadge PE (Jan 24, 2019)

> In a 25-page written ruling issued on 28 December, Judge Stacie F. Beckerman found the board has a “history of overzealous enforcement actions” and called its restrictions on the use of the word engineer “substantially overbroad” and in violation of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. She declared that Järlström may study and communicate publicly or privately about his theories relating to traffic lights, as long as his remarks occur outside the context of any employment or contractual relationship with a governmental or other group that changes or implements or has final approval to change or implement traffic-light timing without the review and acceptance of responsibility by an Oregon-licensed professional engineer.
> 
> The judge also wrote, “The term engineer, standing alone, is neither actually nor inherently misleading.
> 
> “Courts have long recognized that the term engineer has a generic meaning separate from professional engineer and that the term has enjoyed widespread usage in job titles in our society to describe positions which require no professional training.”


Yeah, I'm calling BS.

Let's replace "engineering degree" with "law degree (JD)", and replace "professional engineer" with "barred" or "admitted lawyer". Now lets just say that that individual goes before a city council, calls themself a lawyer and produces testimony that a certain regulation is improper. Would Judge Beckerman call that protected speech? 

I doubt it.


----------



## Panchito (Jan 24, 2019)

I agree the term engineer is loosely used in some companies. I have seen job titles such as "quote engineer", "proposal engineer", "bid engineer", "customer engineer", etc


----------



## Andrew Siegrist (Feb 16, 2019)

Panchito said:


> I agree the term engineer is loosely used in some companies. I have seen job titles such as "quote engineer", "proposal engineer", "bid engineer", "customer engineer", etc


Exactly, I am surprised how much the term "engineer" has been worked into a variety of position titles when most of those probably do not hold a license. In construction management, we have "project engineer" as an entry level position for typically new graduates but most of these do not even have an engineering degree. In my opinion,  "project engineer" should be more like "project delegator".


----------



## P-E (Feb 16, 2019)

Some of the best engineers don’t have a PE. Some positions are legitimately engineers (train drivers and steam plant operators).  I don’t care all that much to be honest, people can see through the BS titles.   Most titles are BS anyhow.


----------



## invu (Mar 22, 2019)

Personally, I think boards should be able to protect the word “engineer”.  I think that putting something in place such as E.G. for engineering graduate. E.I. for engineering intern, and P.E. for professional engineer would be benificial.  That would limit the confusion and would help standardize everything.  Therefore you could be John Smith-Project Engineer- E.G. and everyone would know what you are.  People without those credentials would be referred to as Project Manager or any other variation without using the word engineer.


----------

