As I noted about "not going into great detail" my frame of reference was those engineers licensed by one of the several states. While each state is different, many do now require continuing education to maintain such license. From my experience w/Texas, professional ethics is part of the required annual training required in maintaining the license as a "Professional Engineer".
On Jul 18, 2011, at 9:37 AM, Curt Austin <[email protected]> wrote: > Bill, > > I worked as an engineer for a long time. I'm not sure what you are referring > to regarding engineering ethics. This is what I know about the formal ethics > involved: > > General Electric would regard you as an engineer if you had a degree with the > word "engineer" in it (but not if it included the word "technology", which > would label you a technician). The pay for scientist and engineer was the > same, so this was handled similarly. I believe this was an internal practice, > without any external need other than to support billing the government > properly in cost-plus-fee contracts. > > Backing up some, there is little or no ethics training in an engineering > curriculum, as far as I know. I spent the entire 1970's getting various > engineering degrees - nothing then, at least. > > In some fields, and for some purposes, it is helpful to become a > "Professional Engineer". This means passing a state-administered test and > meeting some other basic requirements (a degree or equivalent experience, for > example). Few engineers have a need to do this. A construction design firm > needs at least one professional engineer to sign drawings; young civil > engineers with any ambition will take the test as soon as possible, before > they forget everything. My sense is that it is a far easier test to pass > than, say, a bar exam - it is not used to limit the number of engineers in > order to protect $400/hour fees. I don't know what ethics code may be > involved - a lot is implied when you sign a drawing - "I certify that this > bridge will not fall down." > > The nature of engineering is devising and maintaining machines, facilities > and processes that make things easier, which usually means reducing labor. In > a well-functioning society (picture 100 people on an island to avoid the > complexities of credit default swaps, etc.), there are better things to do, > and this frees up labor to do them. "Hey, this coconut-husking machine is > great! Let's go plant some pineapples." > > Incidentally, when you look at a jet engine from the side, you can hardly see > anything but tubing. There's a need to pipe air from various places to other > places - to purge bearings, balance thrust loads, pressurize the cabin - all > sorts of things. This tubing is intricately fabricated, welded, bent, and > shaped. The shop where all this tubing is made would look familiar to a brass > instrument maker (except for the welding). It's made in relatively small > quantities, and largely by "hand" (meaning basic machines and lots of > tooling). > > Curt Austin > > > > On Jul 18, 2011, at 6:51 AM, Bill Gross wrote: > >> Hans raises a long term ethical question often not addresses in the >> engineering community. Without going into great detail, in the US the >> engineering profession has professional ethics that deal with the way they >> provide their professional service. The one thing that has never really >> been addressed is what responsibility an engineer who develops a new >> manufacturing process has to the employees who might be displaced because of >> it. >> > > _______________________________________________ > post: [email protected] > unsubscribe or set options at > https://pegasus.memphis.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/options/horn/bgross%40airmail.net _______________________________________________ post: [email protected] unsubscribe or set options at https://pegasus.memphis.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/options/horn/archive%40jab.org
