@JordiGH Devaluing of the same work when it's done for an entertainment/art product?
@ink_slinger Maybe! Or maybe overvaluing the other one, I don't know.
I want "engineer" to be a licensed profession, with regulations and a code of ethics.
@JordiGH That's a good point. And, actually, engineer *is* a licensed profession (albeit a self-governed one). Are computer engineers licensed and regulated in the same way as, say, mechanical engineers? As far as I know, they aren't, but I may be wrong about that. Why are they even allowed to use the word?
@ink_slinger And there has been rare enforcement of the term "engineer" in Canada, but last I heard about it was in Québec, 16 years ago. I think the term "engineer" has been bandied about since then without a lot of enforcement.
@JordiGH I didn't realize it wasn't regulated in the US.
@ink_slinger I know, that's so nuts to me. FREEDOM!!
It's as crazy to me as having anyone go and say they're a physician or a lawyer, with nobody checking up on their credentials.
@JordiGH On the other hand, you have things like retired engineers basically selling their stamp to anyone willing to pay, as if it's totally fine for a retired chemical engineer to stamp plans for a suspension bridge or something. Of course, because it's regulated in Canada, that could come back to badly bite that person in the ass if the bridge collapses.
@ink_slinger Really, I didn't know chemical engineers were stamping bridges for money. That's another problem.
I actually took an engineering ethics course in university, despite not becoming an engineer. They made a big deal about the iron ring and how its sound of scratching on paper as you sign was supposed to remind you of your duty to society.
@JordiGH I don't think it's common. And it's definitely not ethical. But it happens.
@ink_slinger @JordiGH mmmmm engineer here (EIT) registered with APEGA, ask me anything. For what it's worth chemical engineers can't just stamp off on a bridge, much less retired ones. If you retire you are no longer registered with your engg org, and you wouldn't be able to practice.
And if you have evidence of someone misrepresenting the profession do share because APEGA and related orgs have the ability to take action on stuff like that.
@thatgeoguy @JordiGH Not formally retired, I suppose, because they still have an active stamp. I don't have personal evidence of anything, just stories I've heard from engineers. Might be more US type stories. Not sure, to be honest. (ChemE stamping a bridge is probably hyperbole; but CivilE stamping a bridge he had nothing to do with? Bad but technically legal, right)
In no way does this forbid unions, just lays out your priorities in your work. It says nothing about unions. Going back to Chem engg stamping a bridge for a Civil project, see the second rule in the code of ethics in section 3.2, which translated from legalese is: "stay in your lane bro." :)
@thatgeoguy @JordiGH I wonder where the misinterpretation of "no unions" came from. I was told this explicitly by an engineer (who is definitely not anti-union himself). I'm not going to read the entire document, but a quick scan doesn't turn up anything that could obviously misinterpreted that way. Very odd.
@ink_slinger @JordiGH Perhaps he was attempting to start / join a union that was meant to take the place of a professional engineering ethics body? That's not allowed. Your union does not overrule your obligation to APEGA, and you cannot replace APEGA with another union / organization. That's codified into law.
But there hasn't been a case of APEGA coming down on people for joining the Alberta Union of Provincial Employees (AUPE). I mean, I was a member myself once upon a time!
Based on every interaction / class / document I've ever read from APEGA though, this isn't really a conflict until it you make it a conflict.
Perhaps it was some misunderstanding of that bit, thinking that it technically forbade you from being part of a union because it was "another organization." I have no idea. Now I'm very curious. I'll have to ask him about it some time.
@ink_slinger @JordiGH Yeah, each province encodes a single organization with the authority to self-govern engineering in that province. It's nationalized in that sense. You can't make up your own standards body and then say "screw you APEGA we have our own club now."
This is to prevent e.g. big companies (oil&gas) from making their own "standards bodies" with their own "code of ethics" that run counter to the point of having an engineering practice in the first place.
The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!