APEGGA Question

[dannie]

So, here is the situation. One of the companies that we own is a technology firm. The CEO of this corporation was in a main article in a Canadian Technology magazine. In the article, the journalist mentioned the word "engineering" twice. We have since received a letter from Apegga threatening sanctions against the corporation because of the two words.

Now, let me say this. No where in the corporate name is the word engineer. No where in the advertising, the website or anything that we are affiliated with; invloves the word engineer. I spent 3 hours reading the legislation last nite for Apegga, but I cannot find any regulation that states they can sanction a corporation unless they are in violation of certain things (ie: name with engineering in it).

Does anyone have an insight that I may have missed? Or perhaps first hand knowledge of Apegga?

I have called a few friends with their engineering degrees and they basically told me to tell Apegga to suck it.

[Penis McNickels]

To APEGGA the article implies that your corporation provides engineering services when in fact it does not; otherwise, they would have a permit to practice registered with APEGGA.

I am glad to see my dues are going to something worthwhile. I hope you wannabe engineers pay through the nose!

HA!

[dannie]

So basically because the journalist took liberties in his article, they are taking the word of a journalist vs. the company and head of the company that has been valid and subsiting for 9 years?

[Penis McNickels]

And just to clarify, I refer you to Part 1 Section 3 (1)(b) of The Engineering, Geological and Geophysical Professions Act.

"3(1) No individual, corporation, partnership or other entity, except a professional engineer, licensee or permit holder entitled to engage in the practice of engineering, shall

(b) represent or hold out, expressly or by implication, that the individual, corporation, partnership or other entity
(i) is entitled to engage in the practice of engineering, or
(ii) is a professional engineer, licensee or permit holder."


HA HA!

[prae]

Probably more of a knee-jerk response from APEGGA than anything else.

They do that to prevent companies from purporting to offer engineering services... but its always been intended to catch the guys billing themselves as engineers and performing services which would require real engineering and the type of certification/responsibility/liability that entails...

I would say you have nothing to worry about. I know this exact letter as my employer received one a few months ago. And we employ 5-10 professional engineers registered with apegga and perform engineering in house... the company had not registered w/ apegga.

[Rat Fink]

.

[Penis McNickels]

Originally posted by dannie
So basically because the journalist took liberties in his article, they are taking the word of a journalist vs. the company and head of the company that has been valid and subsiting for 9 years?

Maybe you guys should have the journalist retract his statements. Or at least bill him the fine APEGGA may send your way.

To be honest, I am not familiar on how they deal with these kind of complaints. And most likely, some engineer somewhere read the article and complained...

[prae]

Originally posted by Penis McNickels
And just to clarify, I refer you to Part 1 Section 3 (1)(b) of The Engineering, Geological and Geophysical Professions Act.

"3(1) No individual, corporation, partnership or other entity, except a professional engineer, licensee or permit holder entitled to engage in the practice of engineering, shall

(b) represent or hold out, expressly or by implication, that the individual, corporation, partnership or other entity
(i) is entitled to engage in the practice of engineering, or
(ii) is a professional engineer, licensee or permit holder."


HA HA!

a big part of me pretty much mirrors Penis McNickels' sentiment. I think douchewaffles that bill themselves as engineers when they havent paid their dues should burn.


however... i know the letter you've received and I would not worry about it if I were you. You could always get the magazine to print a small correction if you were that concerned about it. So long as you do not continue to associate yourselves with the practice of engineering nothing will come of this.

[dannie]

So then this retard journalist took too many liberties with what the corporation does. This company is not an engineering firm. We employ a gentleman with an engineering background, but he is not using that portion of his background with us.

Alright..... so I'm just gonna tell them to piss off.

Do you know of any sanctions that they can place against a corporation that is not affiliated with them nor is practicing? From what I understood from legislation, you would have to be a part of Apegga to be sanctioned or be actually doing some sort of engineering

[dannie]

"Tell APEGGA to go after the journalist!, and get the CEO to spend an afternoon drafting up a statement with a lawyer to send to APEGGA setting them straight"

Thats a great idea actually. I totally get where you are all coming from, in regards to people saying they are engineers and arent. And I have to say I agree with that standpoint 100%. In this case, we aren't.

Ok, if you all have any other ideas, please please let me know.
Thanks Again!!

[prae]

Originally posted by dannie
So then this retard journalist took too many liberties with what the corporation does. This company is not an engineering firm. We employ a gentleman with an engineering background, but he is not using that portion of his background with us.

Alright..... so I'm just gonna tell them to piss off.

Do you know of any sanctions that they can place against a corporation that is not affiliated with them nor is practicing? From what I understood from legislation, you would have to be a part of Apegga to be sanctioned or be actually doing some sort of engineering

apegga could sue you for practicing without a license but yes, any sanctions they placed on you would be internal to APEGGA and if you were not intending on practicing engineering would not affect you in any way. afaik. ianal.

like i said, you dont have to be rude about it, just dont worry about it. I'm sure they employ an army of people whose sole responsibility is to read technical articles. Any companies appearing to practice that are not registered are potential sources of income.

[prae]

It's obvious all of the above advice from myself and others is just off the cuff kind of stuff. Your supposed problem could easily be solved with two phone calls to apegga and the author of the aforementioned article.

[dannie]

"I'm sure they employ an army of people whose sole responsibility is to read technical articles."

They do!!!! Our Chief Technical Officer called to find out what this was all about; the guy said they employ "minions" to go through the internet, websites, articles, radio interviews etc. So when our CTO questioned him about why this company was never on their radar, he didn't say anything. :)

[Penis McNickels]

Originally posted by prae
You could always get the magazine to print a small correction if you were that concerned about it. So long as you do not continue to associate yourselves with the practice of engineering nothing will come of this.

I agree, I would think that a correction by the journalist and providing proof that your corporation never once implied that they provide engineering services would appease APEGGA.


And if that is the case, I would have no problem and why would APEGGA?

I am somewhat please to see that APEGGA is actually out enforcing the title "engineer" and all that in encompasses. Because if I have to $265 a year to call myself an engineer, I don't see why people should get to do it for free... In the states this is a bigger problem as not all states actively enforce the title "engineer", plus they have all these lame exceptions for other industries, which just makes things worse.

[dannie]

I agree with you. One of the other businesses that we have deals with corporations. You CANNOT register a company with the term engineer in it. The Alberta government prohibits you from it immediately unless you have a certificate from APEGGA. I think it is a good thing. You guys go to school for so long to get that designation, you should be protected.

[Crymson]

IT's the same accross the board. If you're the "chief geologist" or " VP of exploration" or your little 5 man oil and gas start-up company, and you post your quarterly earnings. It's garuanteed that some APEGGA beaurocrat ASSHOLE is going to pull your name from the prospectus, and if you're not in APEGGA, you're garuanteed to get an angry letter.

[dannie]

So it isn't just us?? The APEGGA guys are pricks right??

[BlackArcher101]

I fail to see how using the word "engineering" in an article implies that the company actually provides engineering services. Of course being able to read how the word was used in the context of the article might help us greatly.

How can you sue someone for providing engineering services without a permit when they don't even try to provide the service in the first place?

I'd tell em to go away. Do you know how many "Field Engineers" work in oil & gas without being close to a PEng and they let it slide?

[dj_honda]

Originally posted by Crymson
IT's the same accross the board. If you're the "chief geologist" or " VP of exploration" or your little 5 man oil and gas start-up company, and you post your quarterly earnings. It's garuanteed that some APEGGA beaurocrat ASSHOLE is going to pull your name from the prospectus, and if you're not in APEGGA, you're garuanteed to get an angry letter.

Good. Why would you want some joe blow giving geological results to the public? Unless of course your 5 man oil and gas start-up company isn't legit.

The EGGP act I am pretty sure was passed into law or if not, is at least enforced or whatever by the government of Alberta. So if you don't comply with Apegga I am sure there are some further consequences down the road.

The whole point is to protect the public from random douchebags calling themselves engineers when they aren't. I'm sure you guys wouldn't want people going around opening up clinics calling themselves "doctors" when they aren't.

Now for your specific case, I'm sure it was a misunderstanding and just getting the author to offer a correction or something to that degree will probably end up solving the problem.

[dannie]

That is our issue. It doesn't. The article is about my CEO. It says,

"His sister, an engineer, was working for Com Dev International Ltd which designs and manufactures gear for satellites. Com Dev had a contract with a Japanese company to help build a spacecraft for a mission to Mars. The Cambridge Ontario based company wanted to farm out some of the instrumentation work. Outer space is a long way from Alberta's oilpatch, but (our CEO) figured engineering was enginnering, so he bid. He somehow convinced the seasoned execs at Com Dev to let him have the contract, delievered on it profitably and went on to build his company into a million-dollar-a-year consulting firm by 1999 when he sold out to a European Space consultacy and beacme the North American Head."


Do any of you see why this would be an issue? Cuz I certainly don't.

[foos_guy]

Originally posted by dannie

... Outer space is a long way from Alberta's oilpatch, but (our CEO) figured engineering was enginnering, so he bid..."


This is probably the sentence that APEGGA is having a fit about. It gives the perception that your company practices in the field of "Engineering".

The company may not practice any engineering, but someone reading that article may not know that and would assume what the article is saying to be true. APEGGA is just performing its due diligence to protect the public (from companies that practice engineering but not licensed to do so....).

[Spoons]

Originally posted by dannie
So it isn't just us?? The APEGGA guys are pricks right??

Nope. Engineers are just assholes who rule the world. :D

:rolleyes:

[Penis McNickels]

Originally posted by Spoons


Nope. Engineers are just assholes who rule the world. :D


It's true.

And yes, I think I am better than you.

[dj_honda]

just curious, how does your company do "instrumentation work" without engineering? does it just hire contractors or something?

[dannie]

The quote above

"Outer space is a long way from Alberta's oilpatch, but (our CEO) figured engineering was enginnering, so he bid..."

Was about his past. This was in 1997 in Ontario when he worked on the Space Project. It has nothing to do with the current corporation.

We hire out a contracted company in the U.S.

[Spoons]

Originally posted by Penis McNickels


It's true.

And yes, I think I am better than you.

I know its true. I'm studying to be an engineer at U of C. I am already an asshole, now comes the cocky prick portion.

[Penis McNickels]

Originally posted by dannie
The quote above

"Outer space is a long way from Alberta's oilpatch, but (our CEO) figured engineering was enginnering, so he bid..."

Was about his past. This was in 1997 in Ontario when he worked on the Space Project. It has nothing to do with the current corporation.

We hire out a contracted company in the U.S.

Ontario, eh?

I guess I better make a complaint to the PEO about this guy. Can't have him running his mouth, pretending to be an engineer wherever he goes.

[Seanith]

Originally posted by Penis McNickels
To APEGGA the article implies that your corporation provides engineering services when in fact it does not; otherwise, they would have a permit to practice registered with APEGGA.

I am glad to see my dues are going to something worthwhile. I hope you wannabe engineers pay through the nose!

HA!



Originally posted by dannie
So it isn't just us?? The APEGGA guys are pricks right??



Originally posted by Penis McNickels


Ontario, eh?

I guess I better make a complaint to the PEO about this guy. Can't have him running his mouth, pretending to be an engineer wherever he goes.

haha you're a funny penis.

I agree that the best course of action is to get the journalist to make a correction notice and let APEGGA know that it has been corrected.

No they aren't pricks, they just have the right to protect the term of "engineer" and "engineering" in Alberta. Its similar to a trademark I guess.

The way that article was phrased, it definitely sounds like your company practices engineering, and the founder shouldn't be tossing around crazy talk like that lol.

[dannie]

But, that's what I am saying. The article was about him and HIS background. Not the company. They asked about what he did, previous accomplishments etc. I just don't see how his background in engineering is such an issue with these guys. I personally think that one of the posters is right, it was a knee-jerk reaction from APEGGA. I think if the minion that read the article had a half a brain, he would see that the article is about him and is accomplishments. Not about the corp. Oh well.... dumb people are around everywhere :)

I just didn't see how they could sanction us for anything. I had him draft a letter to APEGGA this afternoon explaining the article, giving them a copy of it and nicely telling them to piss off as they have no jurisdiction.

Thanks for all the help though guys. I really appreciate it!!

[broken_legs]

In capitalist America, an engineer is someone who is in charge of maintenance at a hotel.




I think APEGGA is going a little overboard here.

I could see if it was a direct reference, but a third party says something about a company?? how can you possibly make a case against the company??

[Seanith]

Originally posted by dannie

I just didn't see how they could sanction us for anything. I had him draft a letter to APEGGA this afternoon explaining the article, giving them a copy of it and nicely telling them to piss off as they have no jurisdiction.


Thats the thing, they DO have jurisdiction. Sure, they are being a little petty here, but they are sanctioned by the Alberta Government to regulate and "protect" the engineering profession. Not sure what they can do to you guys, but don't be mistaken, they are within their sphere of influence here.