> 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 liabilit

> 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" ?