|
I am a registered Professional Engineer qualified as a Petroleum Engineer, but under the rules, I'm not supposed to add Software Engiineering to my qualifications, unless I pass a test orget a registered Software Engineer to vouch for me.
The tests is no longer offered, sothe reference is the only available option now.
Is anyone here a registered Software Engineer ?
Regards,
Walt
|
|
|
|
|
I never knew someone needed to be "registered" to be a software engineer. Interesting. 
|
|
|
|
|
It was/is an attempt to make the engineering discipline follow a trade-skill-like path to being an "official" engineer (4yr college -> 4yr or more apprenticeship -> testing -> periodic re-certification). For software at least I lob into into the Mensa pile - useless except for your ego. So to directly respond to your statement: we don't.
|
|
|
|
|
In many US states you cannot have “engineer” in your job title unless you are a registered, Professional Engineer. If you are in engineering role but are not a PE yet, then you add EIT to the role.
Same is true for Architect. You cannot have that in your job title without the state certification.
|
|
|
|
|
which states? NY is not one of them. Neither is Florida, California, Pennsylvania, New Jersey. You know how I know? Those are the states that we have devs in working remote. All of us have official company titles of Software Engineer or Senior Software Engineer.
Been doing this a very long time, and I have never, ever heard of this, not once.
So, please educate me.
|
|
|
|
|
First hit on Google from Massachusetts.
Massachusetts state law prohibits an individual who is not licensed as a professional engineer in the Commonwealth from using a job title which implies to the public that the individual is capable of performing engineering services. See M.G. L. c. 112, §§ 81D, 81T.
Maybe I am more sensitive to this because I was an independent consultant for 30 years. I never would have billed time to “software engineering” or “systems architecture.”
A company that bills the time of a person with a title of “software engineer” to a customer and includes that info in the billing could find themselves in legal hot water if an engagement ends on a sour note.
A hit on CA limits restrictions to use of specific titles like “consulting engineer”, and others that you would expect like “professional engineer”, “electrical engineer “, etc.
It is HR’s and legal departments job to know these rules, not the developers.
|
|
|
|
|
We have software engineers in Boston, Mass, and they never "registered" for the title.
if there is a law, it is not enforced, at all where I have worked, and others I know have worked. I have never heard of this ever.
|
|
|
|
|
I agree it is not enforced.
Since I had the results already up, Ohio says it is fine to use for internal job titles, but then the next sentence talks about “public representation” of same.
That touches on the scenario I raised where lawyers would be involved.
Definitely legal’s problem (and why the state where you execute a contract matters).
Don’t forget that lawyers write the laws to keep their trial lawyer friends in business. Shakespeare had a line about that.😊
|
|
|
|
|
The way I heard it the law is only enforced when someone complains, and then only against the person that was complained about. That probably boils down to "not enforced" for most people, though, especially if most of the folks one is dealing with are convinced that software engineering isn't engineering within the meaning of the act.
It's only slightly terrifying that serious legal trouble is plausibly just a public complaint away for me and plenty of other software developers. At least I have the excuse that I don't provide any services to the public whatsoever. 
|
|
|
|
|
The BLS classifies computer software engineer as a computer specialist which is a separate category to engineer. Due to this I believe you might have issues saying you're an "engineer" but not with saying you're a "software engineer." As dumb as that sounds, that seems to be the current state of affairs. Multiple organizations like the NCEES have shut down their software PE testing due to a lack of participation over the years precisely because it isn't required.
|
|
|
|
|
I got my BSME in 89 and passed the EIT. I never did go in for a PE exam. For that reason I don't claim to be a mechanical engineer, only that I have my BS in ME. It was impressed upon me at Purdue that I could not legally use the term 'engineer' until I passed a PE.
This designation is for civil courts only. It isn't breaking the law, but it can make you liable in civil suits against you.
|
|
|
|
|
I guess it depends on the jurisdiction, but here in Texas and most US states, it is illegal and unethical to use the word Engineer in your title without being registered.
I'm a registered Professional Engineer (PE)specifically for Petroleum Engineering, but not for software Engineering.If I claimed to do Software or any other type of Engineering, I could face sanctions and fines.
|
|
|
|
|
In my research the other day I saw legal arguments off aTexas AG website from 2002 where they were arguing that you should not have the word “engineer” on a business card unless you were a PE. I did not track down if there was any final ruling on the matter, it seemed more like a brief.
I guess if you are debugging, you can call yourself a “software surgeon”, “Don’t bother me now, I have a patient on the table.”
😊
|
|
|
|
|
Very little software is engineered, so there are very few actual software engineers; I've certainly never met one.
Software developer is a much more accurate description. Software architect might suffice for some.
(My father was an electronics engineer; he designed military communications systems.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Walt, I'm a certifiable computer engineer. Oh wait... 
For what it's worth, I've never heard of a context where a PE certification/registration was relevant to a software engineering position. In point of fact, I'd been under the impression that the PE regulatory bodies vehemently disliked the notion of certifying software professionals, and did not consider what we do to be 'engineering'. We do seem to make a dandy living at it, despite our lack.
If you want to claim software engineering skills, go right ahead. If someone gripes, it won't be us.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
It all depends on whether your (potentially unprofessional) work could kill someone, and how that is "managed" (engineered) with respect to responsibility and control of the work.
E.g. the Boeing 737MAX 'software', or the Toyota uncontrolled acceleration, or the London Ambulance service despatch system, or the UK Post Office "Horizon" system (high profile, but few relative to exploding petroleum installations).
Software is difficult to characterised with the old 'physical world' mindset where, for example, the electricians' work can be separated from that of the electrical engineers, but in the logical software world, the developer provides the design drawings(code), which is (essentially) the last touch point before final installation.
However, very little software is a direct killer of the public, especially if it only manipulates logic and data. So, it's going to take a while before the engineering part is cleanly carved out of software development (cf "just coding").
|
|
|
|
|
It's a meaningless title. Might as well be a code monkey, I wouldn't care. As long as the cheque clears.
|
|
|
|
|
If you know how to write and run 'Hello World' in a few programming languages, then you are a Registered Software Engineer.
|
|
|
|
|
No, that makes you an Unregistered Software Executer / Runner, or U.S.E.R.
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
IIRC, this was an idea that became popular in the '90s in certain circles, but never really caught on in the regulatory world. For one thing, "grandfathering" all those who claimed to be software engineers would have made the title meaningless.
I believe that it will happen someday. After all, if certain jurisdictions require passing a test in order to become a hairdresser, why shouldn't commercial software developers have similar requirements? 
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
registered Professional Engineer qualified as a Petroleum Engineer, but under the rules...
Since the other comments have established there is little to no relevant laws, it sounds like these rules are imposed by an independent organization of which you are a member and which holds your petroleum engineer status, no? In which case I have to ask, what's the penalty for breaking said rule? Is your P.E. status under threat? If not, then just add it and claim ignorance if anyone whines later on. But if so, I would say just stick with "software developer" until you find a company who actually cares about such a registration (such a company is probably the only place you will find a registered S.E.), and then bring up this nonsense in the interview, stressing however much experience you have in the field and that you are only lacking an endorsement, and perhaps after a brief probationary/training period, there you go you're registered. I say "interview" because I assume that the only reason you would care about such registration is to pass such a company's hr requirement.
For the record, the term "engineer" to me means that someone who designs engines, which applies to a specific class of software: a black box with a well-defined interface that performs a specific function and can be added to any software that needs such a function. Database engine, physics engine, game engine, search engine etc. The idea is that the specific implementation is difficult to even break down into component parts, and so, the majority of developers who are creating software that use it will be unable or unwilling to break it open to fix or adapt it, so it must be held to a higher standard of adaptability and functionality. So I see the set "software engineers" as a subset of "software developer" that specialize in making libraries.
Definition is in the eye of the beholder. I wouldn't stress over it. In fact, I specifically avoid the word engineer (among other fluff) on my resume, because I don't really want to work for someone who makes decisions based on keywords.
|
|
|
|
|
Memtha wrote: Since the other comments have established there is little to no relevant laws,
That's the $10k question though. Do the engineering licensure requirements written into state law (in the US, they may be at a different level in other countries) apply to people who work in software and choose to call themselves software engineers?
The answer varies some from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, but to my non-lawyerly eye it looks like the answer may well be "Yes" in most or all US States, although lots of developers would probably fall into one of the exceptions written into the various laws and the rest would only be in trouble if someone actually decided to complain to the proper authorities.
You'd have to talk to an actual lawyer to get a really reliable answer, though, preferably one that deals with engineering licensure issues. After all, it doesn't matter what you or I think ought to be the law or what we think the law means. It only matters what the legal system says the law means and will back up with stiff penalties.
|
|
|
|
|
Since "software engineer" isn't a protected term, anyone & their grandma can call themselves one.
I know I do, but not because of any certifications. Rather, because I like engineering software, as well as doing that for a living.
|
|
|
|
|
The law applies to software engineering? I thought it only applied to the types of engineering that could cause physical harm if used improperly - EE, ME, CE, etc. I guess there was a computing option to get the PE but you say that's not offered anymore, so is it still a requirement?
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
