Unlicensed engineers and architects

[Lenbrazil]

A couple of times on this forum and elsewhere I have counted the number of licensed architects and engineers in AE911T, discounted the rest and compared that to total numbers of professional A & E's in the US. Most of them have degrees but not licenses,some seem to have worked in other fields but some claim to be been members of A & E staffs or to have worked as consultants. Are this people legit? How common is it for people to get such degrees and work as architects or engineers for large companies but never get a license? The claims of being consultants seems very questionable to me,but then what do I know?

 

[rwguinn]

A couple of times on this forum and elsewhere I have counted the number of licensed architects and engineers in AE911T, discounted the rest and compared that to total numbers of professional A & E's in the US. Most of them have degrees but not licenses,some seem to have worked in other fields but some claim to be been members of A & E staffs or to have worked as consultants. Are this people legit? How common is it for people to get such degrees and work as architects or engineers for large companies but never get a license? The claims of being consultants seems very questionable to me,but then what do I know?

It is extremely common. I worked for 20 years as a degreed engineer, but without getting the PE.
Major companies have either licensed staff, or waivers (Aerospace firms, for example, have other avenues than having a PE stamp everything, as do most automotive outfits (GM, Chrysler, Ford, Toyota, etc)).
One can spend an entire career as an engineer and never have to stamp (or even sign) a drawing...

 

[R.Mackey]

What he said. There are a very large number of engineers working without PE's. It limits your ability to go into business for yourself, but this isn't usually a big deal if you're a EE or an Aero, for instance. If I was an architect or structural engineer, I'd probably want one since so many do work on their own, but as an Aero, I've never had any need for it.

Of course, since the very existence of AE911T is an argument to authority, whether or not their ranks are licensed really doesn't make much difference...

 

[sylvan8798]

It can also take years for an architect to pass all the parts of the licensing exam, at least in New York. They can pass the exam in parts, but I knew people who had taken the design part 6 or 8 times before they passed it (very subjective apparently). Structural engineers are more likely to get licensed than some of the others, but you have to work for 4 years before you can take the exam.

 

[Grizzly Bear]

I've already worked for an architecture firm in 2007-2008 as a self-employed contractor. I've yet to get anywhere near licensing let alone taking the required exams for it; those will be my concern starting within the next 2 or 3 years

 

[technoextreme]

A couple of times on this forum and elsewhere I have counted the number of licensed architects and engineers in AE911T, discounted the rest and compared that to total numbers of professional A & E's in the US. Most of them have degrees but not licenses,some seem to have worked in other fields but some claim to be been members of A & E staffs or to have worked as consultants. Are this people legit? How common is it for people to get such degrees and work as architects or engineers for large companies but never get a license? The claims of being consultants seems very questionable to me,but then what do I know?

Remember there is a step between having a licensce and not having one called the Engineering in Training. It means you passed the test and you are on your way to getting your licensce.

 

[sylvan8798]

Engineer in Training means you have passed PART 1 of the test, which is basically everything you learned in college. You can take part 1 as a senior. PART 2 you take after 4 years of experience, and is more specific to your particular area of expertise. Both parts are 8 hours long. Or at least they used to be.

 

[Architect]

In the UK it is an offence to call yourself an architect in the course of business unless you are, in fact, registered as such with the Architects Registration Board (ARB); this would be the equivalent of licencing, for you North American chappies. It doesn't matter whether you work for an architecture practice or not, you've got to have it.

So basically, 7 years of hard slog. Minimum.

Well, unless you're going to call yourself an "architectural consultant" or "technician" or some other title that doesn't really fool anyone in the wider market place.

Registration is wholly separate from membership of one of the chartered bodies, such as the RIBA/RIAS/RSUA. Think of these more as a support organisation and trade union.

 

[AZCat]

Engineer in Training means you have passed PART 1 of the test, which is basically everything you learned in college. You can take part 1 as a senior. PART 2 you take after 4 years of experience, and is more specific to your particular area of expertise. Both parts are 8 hours long. Or at least they used to be.

The requirements vary from state to state. I think California only requires 3 years of experience, for example. Also, some disciplines have more than one PE test - structurals have two in Arizona (but you can skip one if you're a registered civil engineer).

 

[Thunder]

calling yourself an Engineer in NY without actually being a PE...would call for an ass-woopin'.

calling yourself an Architect in NY without being an RA..would also require some wup-ass.

 

[rwguinn]

In the UK it is an offence to call yourself an architect in the course of business unless you are, in fact, registered as such with the Architects Registration Board (ARB); this would be the equivalent of licencing, for you North American chappies. It doesn't matter whether you work for an architecture practice or not, you've got to have it.

So basically, 7 years of hard slog. Minimum.

Well, unless you're going to call yourself an "architectural consultant" or "technician" or some other title that doesn't really fool anyone in the wider market place.

Registration is wholly separate from membership of one of the chartered bodies, such as the RIBA/RIAS/RSUA. Think of these more as a support organisation and trade union.

In the US, you are allowed to state "I am an engineer" when describing what you do for a living.
You are not allowed to so state if you are claiming expertise you don't have, or when offering yourself as a consultant.
It's perfectly acceptable to state that you are a degreed engineer on your resume, or state to a hiring manager that you are an engineer. You cannot, however, advertise "Joe's Engineering" if Joe's doesn't have at least 1 Registered PE on staff.

 

[Architect]

Here, it would be illegal to state that "Joe is a degree qualified architect" on the basis that the degree is in "architecture" and to be an "architect" requires additional study, examination, practical experience, and so forth.

And interestingly, for a practice to style itself as "Architects" requires a majority of the partners/directors/equivalent thereof to be registered architects.

The legal test, however, is whether the person is holding themselves out to be an architect for business purposes. As I recall, the legislation is framed to prevent clowns trying to get away with "archi-tec" and things like that too.

 

[Lenbrazil]

So it seems fairly normal for engineers tobe unlicensed and according to Architect its not legal for unlicensed A school graduates to call themselves architects in the UK, but what about in the US? Does anyone know if iscommom for unlicensed architecture grads to work as real architects as opposed to interior designers, draftsmen etc?

 

[switchpoint]

So it seems fairly normal for engineers tobe unlicensed and according to Architect its not legal for unlicensed A school graduates to call themselves architects in the UK, but what about in the US? Does anyone know if iscommom for unlicensed architecture grads to work as real architects as opposed to interior designers, draftsmen etc?

Yes, as long as they work within a company. I work for an engineering firm as a construction manager. A lot of our engineers have PE's some of them do not. Only one stamp has to go on the plans, and it usually is someone who is an officer in the company or in charge of particular area or discipline.

Short answer - yes degreed but unlincesd architects do practise, however, without the ability to put a stamp on their drawings, the really can't do much.

 

[newton3376]

What he said. There are a very large number of engineers working without PE's. It limits your ability to go into business for yourself, but this isn't usually a big deal if you're a EE or an Aero, for instance. If I was an architect or structural engineer, I'd probably want one since so many do work on their own, but as an Aero, I've never had any need for it.

Exactly...as an EE having a Masters degree is far more useful then getting a PE....which is why I will likely never bother with the PE

Of course, since the very existence of AE911T is an argument to authority, whether or not their ranks are licensed really doesn't make much difference...

Yeah....you ever read the "stories" of why they are truthers? Quite pathetic and embarrassing really....

 

[Lenbrazil]

About 2/3 of the engineers in ae911t are not licensed,does that sound about right? Many are computer engineers a field for which I believe licensed aren't issued.

 

[Architect]

I would love to hear what the relevance of computer engineering is to construction.

 

[sylvan8798]

They don't even take Statics, so it's hard to claim even the most rudimentary relevant background past Physics I.

 

[Debaser]

I would love to hear what the relevance of computer engineering is to construction.

And beyond that, what relevance computer engineering is to structural engineering.
Having 'done' civil engineering at Uni I suppose I should be able to weigh in on those hefty debates. However, ask me to design you a motorway and I'll be fine, ask me to design a simple portal frame and I'll be in the corner, curled up in the foetal position, sobbing.

 

[aggle-rithm]

About 2/3 of the engineers in ae911t are not licensed,does that sound about right? Many are computer engineers a field for which I believe licensed aren't issued.

I looked into it once. There is a PE for computer engineering (which covers both hardware and software, I believe) but I don't know anyone who has one. It would require them to have at least some knowlege of other forms of engineering as a prerequisite to taking the test.