Federal judge sides with Oregon Man accused of illegally using the word 'engineer'

[Cal Jeffrey]

A man in Beaverton Oregon who has been fined and is under investigation by the state’s board of engineers for using the word “engineer” during a debate about traffic lights, is being allowed by a federal judge to refer to himself as an engineer and to discuss traffic lights pending the board’s investigation. It seems that in the opinion of the federal district court of Oregon, engineering is not a protected class of employment like being a police officer is. That is to say; one cannot be punished for impersonating an engineer.

According to the Oregonian, Oregon resident Mats Järlström was fined $500 by the Oregon State Board of Examiners for Engineering and Land Surveying last April for using the word “engineer” and claiming to be an engineer in a submitted opinion to the board. The board also barred him from using the word to describe himself. At first glance, it seems the state had justifiable cause. After all, you cannot have people running around doing engineering work who are not qualified; that would be a risk to public safety. However, putting it into the proper context does require a bit of background regarding the man.

"Järlström wishes to communicate about the mathematics behind traffic light timing. If he does so in Oregon, however, he will be exposed to government investigation and punishment for engaging in the unlicensed 'practice of engineering.'"

Mats moved to Oregon in 1992 after immigrating from Sweden where he had worked as an engineer in the Swedish Air Force and also for Luxor Electronics. Currently, he is self-employed doing work testing and repairing audio components and testing equipment. He has never been employed as an engineer in Oregon, but the board is presumably looking into that to reinforce its case against him.

The 56-year-old trained and experienced engineer was fined during a debate with public officials regarding the timing of traffic lights. Even though Järlström was not practicing engineering as employment in any capacity, he was fined for merely suggesting that he knew what he was talking about.

The whole thing started after a traffic camera had caught his wife running a red light and issued her a ticket. Mats began doing research and field study on the duration of traffic lights in Oregon, specifically yellow lights in Beaverton. After compiling his data, he did all the math and formulated an ideal timing for yellow lights based on his research. He presented his findings as a citizen to the Board of Engineers. It was an appeal to look into updating the traffic lights in Oregon, which are not consistent and have not been adjusted in decades despite changes in traffic and road conditions.

Example of Järlström's findings presented to the Oregon Board of Engineers

When presenting such a study to a governing body, it only seems logical that one would include his or her qualifications for making the assessment. It just does not make sense to pose a suggestion to solve a complex problem without indicating what qualifies one to make it in the first place, and that is what Järlström did.

In his proposal, he stated that he was an engineer. Had he not, the pile of papers and research would have been glanced at and then thrown in the trash as something done by an unqualified citizen disgruntled about getting a traffic ticket. For the act of notifying the board that he was a trained and experienced engineer, Mats was fined $500 for practicing engineering without being registered in Oregon.

Perhaps Mats should have said, “I used to be an engineer,” but ask or propose that to any engineer and see how many weird looks you get. Once an engineer, always an engineer. It is not something that just goes away because you do not have a “government permission slip,” as Järlström’s lawyers have said.

The opinion of whether or not anyone should be allowed to call themselves an engineer is contentious, even within the engineering community. Mats Järlström's fight for the right to use the word to describe himself is not over. For now, the court is on his side. The issue has received countless headlines and even a piece done on 60 Minutes, but the Oregon State Board of Examiners for Engineering and Land Surveying are still insisting that he has violated some law or regulation, which is keeping the debate hot.

Are you an engineer? Do you have a license to practice your trade? Do you feel that people should not call themselves engineers unless they are legally sanctioned in the state in which they live?

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/69537-federal-judge-sides-oregon-man-accused-illegally-using.html

 

[Tanstar]

He had the training and had done the work. He's an Engineer whether Oregon likes it or not.

 

[cliffordcooley]

If he has a compelling argument what difference does it make whether he has a state certificate.

 

[mailpup]

Really, they just don't like him or what he has to say and want to shut him up.

 

[EEatGDL]

He's an engineer, no doubt about it, and even what he submitted looks pretty professional, not stupid mumbling. I don't know why it is even in discussion; he's an engineer in the whole sense of the word, you don't have to be employed as such, there's no "used to be" when he's still practicing it.

 

[cliffordcooley]

So a Certified Engineer from Oregon also has certifiable arrogance.

 

[Uncle Al]

A "Stationary Engineer" is one that has training, takes a state test and is certified. In some states like Ohio there are levels of Stationary Engineer based upon hours of work and a more advanced test. None of these include any college course work and for those unfamiliar with the term, it is a person certified to operate & repair high pressure boilers (pressures greater than 15 lbs per square inch). There are other similar titles like Combustion Engineer that are based upon training and certification.

 

[infiltrator]

Some laws in American is so ridiculously stupid.

 

[cliffordcooley]

Some laws in American is so ridiculously stupid.

Sadly if our laws are stupid, they only reflect our stupidity.

 

[MannerMauler]

He had the training and had done the work. He's an Engineer whether Oregon likes it or not.

I second this. If what he was doing affected other people in a way that will harm them without a license, yes, fine him and put him in jail. If you're doing structural engineering in a commercial situation, which he wasn't, you need to be verified by someone else as an engineer with adequate experience because someone other than yourself will be harmed. If you're doing it on your private property, such as building a bridge across a creek in the forest behind your house, who's gonna get hurt? You! Not some random unsuspecting individual doing his or her everyday tasks.

Calculating the time required to stop before a traffic light goes from yellow to red does not qualify as putting others in harm. In fact, it could help prevent accidents in the future. It's not putting anyone in harm's way unless they put into place. And if it fails, it's their fault for not having other engineers vetting it. They're just mad that they're failing at their job in this area and someone found out and let others know.

If you're gonna fine him, fine countless others who do engineering in their spare time by doing any number of activities and call themselves amateur engineers.

 

[Joe 5mith]

Ridiculous.
"Engineer" really doesn't have any specific meaning these days, unless you're very specific. For example "Degreed Engineer", "Registered Engineer", or "Professional Engineer", used to refer to a person with a foundation education of an engineer, which is typically a 4-year bachelor's degree or in some countries, a master's degree in an engineering discipline plus 4–6 years peer-reviewed professional practice culminating in a project report or thesis. (Wikipedia).
Today,wWe also have, for example, many types of "engineers":
Railroad Engineer - the guy who drives the train.
Building Engineer - the janitor in charge.
Sanitation Engineer - garbage man.
Etc, etc.
So the term "engineer' has become highly bastardized, and can refer to just about anyone.
My wife is a very good Household Engineer.

 

[Hexic]

Semantics, it's all that is these days. This is coming from an engineer.

 

[Bao Nguyen]

According to my Bachelor Degree I'm a Software Engineer, am I qualified?

 

[Flobberknock]

Absolutely ludicrous.

How can someone who has made a valid and just point, tried to be helpful by improving the community around him by showing the local government something that should be changed be CHARGED for doing so?

What a crazy world we live in.

Either the local government got stroppy about being proven wrong or unhappy that they may lose out on money from all the red light tickets they're currently firing out, maybe both.

Hopefully this gets overturned by someone who's sane.

 

[mailpup]

Flobberknock, I'm guessing you didn't actually read through the article or did you?

 

[stewi0001]

Mats: "Hi I'd like to suggest an improvement for better street safety and what not. I did a lot of research and I'm an engineer."

Board: "WTF!!! you're not an engineer!!!"


Also, this is one of the reasons lawyers exist. To debate and justify the meaning of a word.

 

[p51d007]

Typical for government....challenge them, and they will try to make your life a living h*ll.
They want compliant sheep.

 

[Raoul Duke]

As I've mentioned we have a legal system, not a justice system. All that will matter in what happens to this guy is what the letter of the law says, lawyers and the Court will decide that. Whether their decision is morally justifiable is not in their domain, it's in the hands of those who make the laws and usually they are too busy to look back and change asinine legislation.

 

[mbrowne5061]

I am a registered EIT with the state of Massachusetts. I hold a 5-year BS degree in engineering (its a highly specialized degree) and presently work as an electrical engineer. Let me tell you, the state registration processes are backwards and expensive.

Legally speaking, you can only call yourself an engineer if you have an ABET accredited degree and work a job with the title "engineer" in it, or have worked enough time under a PE, it has been certified by the same PE, and you take and pass the FE exam. But taking the FE is not straight forward. First you need to register with your state, for a small fee. Then you need to take the Fundamentals of Engineering exam, for a larger fee. Then, after you pass, you need to certify the results with the state for the largest fee of all - and then wait several months for that process to finish. The whole process can cost several hundred dollars, not counting any FE prep courses or materials you may obtain just to pass. So coming from a foreign country, with a non-ABET degree (presumably), he would have had to work under a PE for several years before he could even become an EIT, then work several more years before he could become a PE himself - or go back to school for four years and get an ABET-accredited degree and find a job as a late-career engineer with a fresh degree (not easy).

So from that perspective, he did break the law by calling himself an engineer. But the Oregon Engineering Board is wrong to punish him for it. He wasn't selling any services as engineer, nor offering any guarantee, so he wasn't claiming to be a practicing engineer. He was providing useful information, free of charge, to the state for their own consideration, and stating his previous qualifications to explain how he arrived at his conclusions. A slight difference, but a difference nonetheless. There isn't a state around that would take the word of someone not employed or contracted by them at face value, engineer or not. Of course they were going to check his math anyway.

Oregon's time would be better spent hunting down all the software "engineers" who hold only a high school diploma and don't know a lick of the calculus behind the algorithms they are writing. The number of job postings I find for "software engineer" where the education requirement is "high school diploma or GED" is mind boggling. You want to call them a Software Technician? Fine. You don't need to know the calculus as a Tech, but I have refused to call someone in the past an engineer because they didn't have a degree or EIT/PE certification.

 

[cliffordcooley]

First you need to register with your state, for a small fee. Then you need to take the Fundamentals of Engineering exam, for a larger fee. Then, after you pass, you need to certify the results with the state for the largest fee of all

That's it in a nutshell right there. He didn't pay for his state right to present his findings. In a land where freedom has to be bought (everything needs to be licensed) and free speech is also suppressed unless it is bought (through certificates/diplomas). So basically if you haven't paid for your freedom, you are not free to do anything. And if you haven't been told what to say, you are not qualified to say anything.

 

[gnpfrslo]

OK so, I agree that the government and institutions should have very clear and strict rules and moderation over who can call themselves engineers or experts in a topic, but to deny that a person who has been trained and has a degree the title of engineer simply due to a convoluted bureaucratic agreement is simply the opposite of what said institutions should aim to do, it should suffice for this man so show his college degree from whichever University in whatever country it is he got it from.

 

[merikafyeah]

"Engineer" is basically the new "Editor". It could mean a hundred different things.

Sadly science is often not as meritocratic as it ideally should be. Don't have a piece of paper that "certifies" you? Tough, your ideas are crap.

 

[bexwhitt]

This at its core is a free speech issue, stick with it all the way.

 

[bexwhitt]

I am a registered EIT with the state of Massachusetts. I hold a 5-year BS degree in engineering (its a highly specialized degree) and presently work as an electrical engineer. Let me tell you, the state registration processes are backwards and expensive.

Legally speaking, you can only call yourself an engineer if you have an ABET accredited degree and work a job with the title "engineer" in it, or have worked enough time under a PE, it has been certified by the same PE, and you take and pass the FE exam. But taking the FE is not straight forward. First you need to register with your state, for a small fee. Then you need to take the Fundamentals of Engineering exam, for a larger fee. Then, after you pass, you need to certify the results with the state for the largest fee of all - and then wait several months for that process to finish. The whole process can cost several hundred dollars, not counting any FE prep courses or materials you may obtain just to pass. So coming from a foreign country, with a non-ABET degree (presumably), he would have had to work under a PE for several years before he could even become an EIT, then work several more years before he could become a PE himself - or go back to school for four years and get an ABET-accredited degree and find a job as a late-career engineer with a fresh degree (not easy).

So from that perspective, he did break the law by calling himself an engineer. But the Oregon Engineering Board is wrong to punish him for it. He wasn't selling any services as engineer, nor offering any guarantee, so he wasn't claiming to be a practicing engineer. He was providing useful information, free of charge, to the state for their own consideration, and stating his previous qualifications to explain how he arrived at his conclusions. A slight difference, but a difference nonetheless. There isn't a state around that would take the word of someone not employed or contracted by them at face value, engineer or not. Of course they were going to check his math anyway.

Oregon's time would be better spent hunting down all the software "engineers" who hold only a high school diploma and don't know a lick of the calculus behind the algorithms they are writing. The number of job postings I find for "software engineer" where the education requirement is "high school diploma or GED" is mind boggling. You want to call them a Software Technician? Fine. You don't need to know the calculus as a Tech, but I have refused to call someone in the past an engineer because they didn't have a degree or EIT/PE certification.

I think you will find Oregon's protected state for the word engineer will be thrown out by the time this is finished. If anything the stolen valor act of 2005 has shown us(found unconstitutional ) free speech is king. Don't get me wrong I am leery about people calling themselves software engineers as getting an Engineering degree is one of the harder paths to follow. Free Speech trumps all ill-advised laws that attempt to regulate said speech.

 

[Raoul Duke]

I hold a 5-year BS degree in engineering

maybe it's a local thing, but I much prefer BSc for Bachelor of Science than a BS degree although we used to joke that PhD stood for "piled higher and deeper"