Guess what? You are not a "real" Engineer.

[Strainger]

Although I suppose I could just take the EIT too (but that’s another eight hour test; screw that ).

[Una_Persson]

Strainger, different States have different rules. You need to check your State’s specific rules to see.

However…maybe really one answer to this is to remove some of the barriers to being a PE. I mean…the test is no real measure of ability, responsibility, or respectability. There has to be a lower barrier for entry, I feel.

[zut]

Strainger: Check out the registration rules from Arizona:

32-122.01 Qualifications for professional registration
A. An applicant for professional registration as an architect, engineer, geologist or landscape architect shall:

1. Be of good moral character and repute.
2. Be actively engaged in education or experience, or both, in the profession for which registration is sought for at least eight years.
3. Unless exempt under section 32‑126, pass the in‑training and professional examinations in the profession in which registration is sought.
   [snip]
   D. Except as provided in subsection E of this section, experience credited by the board under this section and sections 32‑101, 32‑122 and 32‑126 must be attained under the direct supervision of a professional who is satisfactory to the board and registered in this state, another state or a foreign country in the profession in which the applicant is seeking registration, except that up to one year’s experience may be attained under the direct supervision of a professional who is satisfactory to the board and registered in another profession regulated under this chapter in this state, another state or a foreign country.

E. By two-thirds majority vote the board may allow an applicant except for an architect applicant to meet the requirements of subsection D of this section by crediting comparable experience satisfactory to the board that the applicant attained without direct supervision of a registered professional.

Looks like Section E is your ticket. I’l point out that I was in a similar predicament to you: for registration, my state required testimonials from three PEs who worked with me. However, I only worked with one PE. The registration board had a standard procedure to work around the lack of licensed colleagues, involving writing an explanation and proposing an alternative solution which was acceptable to the board, etc, etc. Kind of a pain in the ass, but not a real barrier. It seems like the board in AZ may well accept your actual experience in lieu of experience under direct supervision of a professional engineer.

[Ficer67]

Just goes to show you that engineers are psychoes

[Strainger]

Thanks, Anthracite and zut for the information. At the very least the PE is definitely something I should look into.

Now if I can just get around that “good moral character and repute” requirement…

[BluEarthArtist]

1. my “legal ramifications” remark applied to state restrictions and penalties of the use of the word engineer. How you translated that to a general jibe at the PEs here is a good question (that you don’t need to answer).

Being a PE is relevant in some disciplines does signify a better-qualified engineer in those given disciplines, but the PEs seem to be trying to extend it into other areas where it’s not an issue.

2. re: PhDs. Few that I know of in my field have a thesis even remotely related to this field, mainly because most of them stumble into it from other careers. But it sure looks good on the CV.

you said:
“”“Board Certification is very similar to the PE in that one can practice medicine without one”""

I’d concede to your analogy, except that the doctors who practice without BC aren’t restricted by law from being “doctors”, are they? Or not?

“”“Two posts and you’re already tossing barbs at me. Either you read invective in my response and are trying to respond in-kind, or you’re just acting like an ass. Let me know which one.”""

Obviously, I’d say the former.