North Carolina tells retired engineer he can't talk about engineering
1–10 of 408 posts
Re: North Carolina tells retired engineer he can't talk about engineering
#2It's not clear from the complaint if he's being threatened with legal action because he's voiced his opinion, or because he prepared testimony as an expert witness concerning engineering in a trial.
Given that the case cites numerous times he gave his opinion in "public and quasi-judicial" fora without mentioning reprimand, it seems like it's the latter. That's doesn't sound like a first amendment violation. Truth is not the only bar to clear in legal testimony.
Re: North Carolina tells retired engineer he can't talk about engineering
#3No opinion on whether this is a new development or not, but needing a license to talk about engineering is really stupid. By far the majority of engineering work is stating the obvious. Even a novice with some calculus background could probably come to the right answer if they had access to the necessary data. Maybe they'd need a little help warming up. Engineers are just more reliable at getting to the obvious answer, and have made enough mistakes that they double check their calculations.
Licensing laws used against people are more likely to be used for political cover rather than to protect the public.
Re: North Carolina tells retired engineer he can't talk about engineering
#4I remember discussions here on HN where people were looking forward to regulating software engineering.
Re: North Carolina tells retired engineer he can't talk about engineering
#5I first read this and immediately thought it was ridiculous. After a second read, I'm wondering if there is some deception going on. The idea that a license should be required to make advisement on designs impacting the public is reasonable. While nothing is guaranteed, it allows for a simple verification of skills.
I find it hard to believe that any engineer would not know this because I was told companies and the gov. use PEs to sign off on designs that impact the public when I was getting my degree in mechanical engineering.
The question here is whether this man was truly barred from speaking publicly about engineering or whether he was barred from testifying about engineering.
The former would be a problem due to its broadness, but the second would definitely not be.
Re: North Carolina tells retired engineer he can't talk about engineering
#6I found this line to be particularly interesting:
> In fact, like the majority of engineers nationwide, Wayne was not required to get a license since he worked for a company under the state’s “industrial exception.”
A half-minute search on Google didn't seem to produce anything of relevance, but I did come across numerous articles talking about licensing not being needed. Would be curious to see more hard data on the number of un-licensed engineers and if there is any correlation to issues / shoddy work or not.
Re: North Carolina tells retired engineer he can't talk about engineering
#7I first read this and immediately thought it was ridiculous. After a second read, I'm wondering if there is some deception going on. The idea that a license should be required to make advisement on designs impacting the public is reasonable. While nothing is guaranteed, it allows for a simple verification of skills. I find it hard to believe that any engineer would not know this because I was told companies and the g…
They could've not considered his testimony, but instead they called it illegal under threat of being charged for a crime for giving his opinion.
Re: North Carolina tells retired engineer he can't talk about engineering
#8It's not clear from the complaint if he's being threatened with legal action because he's voiced his opinion, or because he prepared testimony as an expert witness concerning engineering in a trial. Given that the case cites numerous times he gave his opinion in "public and quasi-judicial" fora without mentioning reprimand, it seems like it's the latter. That's doesn't sound like a first amendment violation. Truth is…
Public hearings for real estate development approval are commonly quasi-judicial. It would be unsurprising if that was the context because it is a context in which other participants would have concerns over unqualified persons holding themselves out as experts. It is also a context in which it is easy to collect evidence.
It is worth distinguishing that engineers are regulated because their opinions carry legal weight. They carry legal weight because the truth is difficult to determine and even experts (i.e engineers) can’t readily determine it absolutely (hence safety factors).
The safety valve for engineering opinion’s weight is engineers are personally liable for errors in judgment (no corporate protection).
Re: North Carolina tells retired engineer he can't talk about engineering
#9No opinion on whether this is a new development or not, but needing a license to talk about engineering is really stupid. By far the majority of engineering work is stating the obvious. Even a novice with some calculus background could probably come to the right answer if they had access to the necessary data. Maybe they'd need a little help warming up. Engineers are just more reliable at getting to the obvious answe…
It would make learning to be an engineer pretty difficult, if you can't talk about stuff until you are qualified!
Re: North Carolina tells retired engineer he can't talk about engineering
#10I found this line to be particularly interesting: > In fact, like the majority of engineers nationwide, Wayne was not required to get a license since he worked for a company under the state’s “industrial exception.” A half-minute search on Google didn't seem to produce anything of relevance, but I did come across numerous articles talking about licensing not being needed. Would be curious to see more hard data on the…
In my experience licensing of engineers is almost exclusive to civil engineering and some other subfields. The vast majority of mechanical, electrical and software engineers will never need to be licensed.
It's also possible for unlicensed engineers to work under the supervision of a licensed engineer (PE), often the PE will be the one to stamp drawings etc.