3 ms·

>"A licensee shall avoid any act which may diminish public confidence in the profession…." putting critique into this category does seem to be such an act on i

by trhway 5y ago

>"A licensee shall avoid any act which may diminish public confidence in the profession…." putting critique into this category does seem to be such an act on its own. On the other side aggressively squashing any heresy - even if it is just a minor deviation from the Party line - has been working great for the Church for 2000 years already.

OldHand2018 5y ago
Let’s say I were a professional engineer and noticed some design flaw in a busy bridge crossing a deep gorge, and that design flaw dramatically increases the likelihood of the bridge plunging into said gorge. If I point out the design flaw, I may diminish public confidence in the profession. If I do not point out the design flaw, the inevitable collapse of the bridge may also diminish public confidence in the profession, but only if the subsequent investigation reveals the design flaw and/or my knowledge of it. What a terrible incentive!
- trhway 5y ago
  Snowden probably can chime in here :) >If I point out the design flaw pointing a design flaw in a project which already got huge money sunk in wouldn't earn much popularity to say the least.
- TheCapn 5y ago
  Public confidence in the engineers comes from the ethical standard to put public & environmental safety paramount to all other requirements. An engineer noticing a fault and ignoring it goes against those ethics so your example is a bit poor, though I do see the relation to the topic at hand. Reading StrongTown's account of things is one side of the story, and they really do make it sound like a bunch of grumpy old assholes are throwing their weight around where they shouldn't be. Assuming this account of facts is accurate and not embellished, I really hope they win and people like the engineers pushing this bullshit get a reality check. I am a P.Eng... Canadian though, and even though I hold the title I do not use the stamp or really work as a traditional engineer a whole lot. I just feel its important to point out that our ethical standards aren't so easily circumvented as ignoring a safety hazard because it might make us look bad.
  - OldHand2018 5y ago
    I believe that my example demonstrates the contradiction in the rules. I’d be willing to bet that when this case goes to trial a similar example will be used - perhaps the I-35 bridge collapse for which a design flaw was ultimately identified as a major factor in the collapse. The state will have to admit that a professional engineer is obligated to speak up about problems in design, which is exactly what they are seeking to punish him for. This isn’t going to end well for Minnesota.
brudgers 5y ago
The board dismissed that complaint per the article.
908B64B197 5y ago
I don't see how discussing designs of public infrastructures publicly would in any ways affect the public's perception of the profession. Pretty much all engineers I've worked with were VERY happy to discuss their designs.

by trhway 5y ago

OldHand2018 5y ago

Let’s say I were a professional engineer and noticed some design flaw in a busy bridge crossing a deep gorge, and that design flaw dramatically increases the likelihood of the bridge plunging into said gorge. If I point out the design flaw, I may diminish public confidence in the profession. If I do not point out the design flaw, the inevitable collapse of the bridge may also diminish public confidence in the profession, but only if the subsequent investigation reveals the design flaw and/or my knowledge of it. What a terrible incentive!

trhway 5y ago
Snowden probably can chime in here :) >If I point out the design flaw pointing a design flaw in a project which already got huge money sunk in wouldn't earn much popularity to say the least.
TheCapn 5y ago
Public confidence in the engineers comes from the ethical standard to put public & environmental safety paramount to all other requirements. An engineer noticing a fault and ignoring it goes against those ethics so your example is a bit poor, though I do see the relation to the topic at hand. Reading StrongTown's account of things is one side of the story, and they really do make it sound like a bunch of grumpy old assholes are throwing their weight around where they shouldn't be. Assuming this account of facts is accurate and not embellished, I really hope they win and people like the engineers pushing this bullshit get a reality check. I am a P.Eng... Canadian though, and even though I hold the title I do not use the stamp or really work as a traditional engineer a whole lot. I just feel its important to point out that our ethical standards aren't so easily circumvented as ignoring a safety hazard because it might make us look bad.
- OldHand2018 5y ago
  I believe that my example demonstrates the contradiction in the rules. I’d be willing to bet that when this case goes to trial a similar example will be used - perhaps the I-35 bridge collapse for which a design flaw was ultimately identified as a major factor in the collapse. The state will have to admit that a professional engineer is obligated to speak up about problems in design, which is exactly what they are seeking to punish him for. This isn’t going to end well for Minnesota.

brudgers 5y ago

The board dismissed that complaint per the article.

908B64B197 5y ago

I don't see how discussing designs of public infrastructures publicly would in any ways affect the public's perception of the profession. Pretty much all engineers I've worked with were VERY happy to discuss their designs.