Quantcast
Are you a scientist (comp. sci, bio, chem, math, phys, etc). you need to read this. - Beyond.ca - Car Forums
Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Are you a scientist (comp. sci, bio, chem, math, phys, etc). you need to read this.

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Calgary
    My Ride
    2009 Forester
    Posts
    276
    Rep Power
    19

    Default Are you a scientist (comp. sci, bio, chem, math, phys, etc). you need to read this.

    I didn't know if i should put this in the careers section or under campus chat.

    I got this letter from the CAP today. It appears as though the professional engineering organization in Ontario is at it again and is trying to have legislation passed which would essentially make it illegal for a scientist to work in their discipline.

    This isn't the first time: an attempt was made several years ago to have this type of legislation introduced, but was defeated.

    Please copy this email and send to as many people as you can.

    2010 August 31


    Dear CAP Member (or recently lapsed member) :

    I am requesting your urgent action on a matter which, if not addressed very promptly, could make it difficult or impossible for many natural scientists to practise their profession in Ontario, and perhaps eventually in most provinces.

    Late last Friday, August 27th, the Canadian Association of Physicists (CAP) sent a letter to the Ontario Attorney-General ("A-G") regarding a very serious threat that a proposed change to the Ontario Engineers Act poses to the ability of natural scientists (and computer scientists / mathematicians) to practise their profession. The letter is long, but the initial "Summary" paragraph which summarizes the threat is reproduced below (if you wish to see the entire letter, it can be downloaded from https://www.cap.ca/onlineforms/Aug10-AG-letter.pdf and the attachments referred to in the letter can be downloaded from https://www.cap.ca/onlineforms/downl...ttachments.pdf ).

    As one who has been deeply involved in this kind of issue, across many Provinces, for 15 years, I can personally assure you that that the problem is real. Robert Mann, Past-President of CAP, spoke with the CEO of Professional Engineers Ontario on Monday, August 30th. During that conversation, it was confirmed verbally that the change was intentional, and that efforts were apparently not made to contact the scientific societies. As a result, the legislative process was very well advanced before it came to light, so that ANY INTERVENTIONS MUST BE MADE VERY SOON, PROBABLY IN THE NEXT FEW DAYS.

    I should perhaps add that the issue here is not to denigrate engineers in any way, nor to suggest that scientists should be allowed to practise outside their areas of expertise. Rather, it is to ensure that the practice of natural science does not get swept into the definition of the practice of professional engineering, which is legally reserved to registered engineers.

    While this may look like an Ontario problem, it is in fact broader, as other provinces could well follow Ontario's example.

    I WOULD THEREFORE ASK YOU TO SEND AN E-MAIL TO THE A-G, with a copy to the others in the distribution list, TO SUPPORT THE CAP'S STAND.

    In the interests of time, a suggested letter appears below, which we would encourage you to cut and paste into an e-mail to the individuals listed in the letter (full set of e-mail addresses appears just above the text of the letter), ensuring that you add in your name, title, and affiliation. Of course, an individually drafted letter is always welcome. At this point, however, the volume of letters is probably the biggest measure.

    With best wishes,


    Paul Vincett
    CAP Director of Science Policy

    =====================================

    SUMMARY PARAGRAPH INCLUDED IN CAP'S LETTER TO ATTORNEY-GENERAL, for your information only (suggested text to send appears below this paragraph)

    We wish to bring to your urgent attention a major problem with one specific component of the currently-proposed revisions to the Ontario Engineering Act, within the Omnibus Act (Bill 68). This revision - the removal of the exemption for natural sciences from the definition of the practice of professional engineering (Chapter 1 of the current Act) - could make it impossible for many, if not most, natural scientists (physicists, chemists, biologists, computer scientists, etc.) to practise their professions, in industry, government, and universities. This could clearly have a major negative impact on Ontario, as well as on the professions concerned. We appreciate that our intervention comes at a late stage of the Bill's progress; however, while our very serious interest in this matter over many years was certainly known to the Professional Engineers of Ontario (PEO), and although PEO has indicated to the Standing Committee reviewing the Bill that they have "consulted broadly wit h other groups", neither we nor (to our knowledge) any other scientific societies were either informed of the existence of the new proposals or consulted in any way. Moreover, despite the representation by PEO to the Standing Committee that the proposed bill 'adopts the national definition of "professional engineering"' (i.e. that suggested in the attached guidelines published by the Canadian Council for Professional Engineers), the proposed legislation fails to include the companion natural science exemption clause which is part of those same guidelines.

    =============================


    SUGGESTED TEXT TO SEND TO A-G AND OTHERS LISTED AT END OF NOTE (USE E-MAIL DISTRIBUTION LIST BELOW TO SEND TO ALL)

    REMINDER: PLEASE DON'T FORGET TO INCLUDE YOUR NAME, TITLE, AND AFFILIATION IN THE SPOT SO DESIGNATED


    e-mail distribution list:

    [email protected]
    [email protected]
    [email protected]
    [email protected]
    [email protected]
    [email protected]



    The Honourable Christopher Bentley
    Ministry of the Attorney-General
    11th Floor, 720 Bay Street
    TORONTO ON M5G 2K1

    Dear Minister Bentley

    I am writing to you to express my grave concern regarding a proposed modification to the Ontario Engineering Act that is embodied in Bill-68.

    The modification to the Act contained in this bill, which is soon to be given 3rd reading in the Ontario Provincial Parliament, removes the exemption for natural sciences from the definition of the practice of professional engineering. This could make it impossible for many physicists (as well as other natural scientists including chemists, biologists, computer scientists, etc.) to practise their professions, whether in industry, government, or university. The great difficulty in defining engineering principles without implicitly including natural science in the definition is what led to the inclusion of a specific exemption for the practise of natural science in the current Act. Removing this exemption will have very damaging impacts on a very broad scale, not only for the scientific community, but also for Ontario's economy, post-secondary research and education system, and even health care.

    Just a few examples of highly-qualified people who could be affected include the following: An expert in lasers working in a laboratory could be prevented from carrying out his/her research without the supervision of an engineer. Similarly, a fully-qualified, experienced medical physicist might be obstructed from practising in a hospital without similar supervision. A Ph.D biologist at a vaccine manufacturer or biotech start-up could not practice without an engineer's supervision, nor could a Ph.D. chemist developing a new drug. Atmospheric scientists who are trained in understanding noise propagation and wind flow over varied terrain could be prevented from assessing site locations for wind turbines. Indeed, any scientist (physicist, chemist, computer scientist, etc.) in industry, government or academia working on anything that could possibly be patentable or create other economic value would be swept in. At the extreme, removal of this exemption could be interpreted to
    mean that weather forecasting, which is currently undertaken by meteorologists in Environment Canada as part of their legislated mandate, must be undertaken by engineers as there is public safety, health, and the protection of property involved.

    I understand that the Bill is at a late stage in the legislative process; however, the natural science community, who are very much impacted by this legislation, were not consulted on this proposed change, nor notified in any way that it was proposed. We became aware of it only by happenstance, a situation that is both surprising and disturbing. It is extremely important, therefore, that you delay the final reading of Bill-68 until it is appropriately reworded so as to re-instate an exemption for the natural sciences.

    Sincerely

    Your name, title
    Institution


    Copies to:
    The Honourable Sarah Pupatello, Minister of Economic Development and Trade
    The Honourable Dalton McGuinty, Premier of Ontario
    Mr. Pat Hoy, Chair, Standing Committee on Finance and Economic Affairs
    Mr. Kim Allen, CEO and Registrar, Professional Engineers of Ontario
    Canadian Association of Physicists

    Tim

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Calgary, AB
    My Ride
    955
    Posts
    1,167
    Rep Power
    20

    Default

    This has already happend in in Alberta. As a Geophysicst i can't call myself a Geophysicist unless and Engineering organizaiton ordains me so.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    2,201
    Rep Power
    21

    Default

    Engineers in this country are a bit too proud of what they do, which from my experience so far is pretty much nothing anyways. The ring, the ceremonies, the whole attitude, get over yourselves, you're all just a bunch of nerds!

    (This is coming from an Engineer btw)
    Originally posted by rage2
    #1: don't ever question me.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    The Peoples Republic of Albertastan
    Posts
    5,245
    Rep Power
    20

    Default

    Originally posted by arian_ma
    Engineers in this country are a bit too proud of what they do, which from my experience so far is pretty much nothing anyways. The ring, the ceremonies, the whole attitude, get over yourselves, you're all just a bunch of nerds!

    (This is coming from an Engineer btw)
    I posted this a long time ago with my old account. Sent it to my office as well.

    A tourist walked into a pet shop and was looking at the animals on display. While he was there, another customer walked in and said to the shopkeeper, "I'll have an AutoCAD monkey please." The shopkeeper nodded, went over to a cage at the side of the shop and took out a monkey. He fitted a collar and leash, handed it to the customer, saying, "That'll be $5000." The customer paid and walked out with his monkey.

    Startled, the tourist went over to the shopkeeper and said, "That was a very expensive monkey. Most of them are only few hundred dollars. Why did that one cost so much?"

    The Shopkeeper answered, "Ah, that monkey can draw in AutoCAD - very fast, clear layouts, no mistakes, well worth the money."

    The tourist looked at a monkey in another cage. "That one's even more expensive! $10,000! What does it do?"

    "Oh, that one's a Design monkey; it can design systems, layout projects, mark-up drawings, write specifications, some even calculate. All the really useful stuff," said the shopkeeper.

    The tourist looked around for a little longer and saw a third monkey in its own cage. The price tag around its neck read $50,000. He gasped to the shopkeeper, "That one costs more than all the others put together! What on earth does it do?"

    The shopkeeper replied, "Well, I haven't actually seen it do anything, but it says it's an Engineer."
    Originally posted by adam c

    Line goes up, line goes down, line does squiggly things and fucks Alberta
    "The stone age didn't end because we ran out of stones"

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Sorrow
    My Ride
    Hatred
    Posts
    3,608
    Rep Power
    22

    Default

    LOLZ.. Silly monkeys.

    Way to be a racist Cos.
    -U

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    NE
    My Ride
    Ram 1500, '68 Camaro, S14
    Posts
    1,939
    Rep Power
    42

    Default

    Haha some engineer's are pure genius, and i have nothing but respect for them. But some are such fucking retards, and they're usually the ones that hold the stereo type eng-douche persona.

    I'm just a lowly designer monkey though, so what do i know

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Sorrow
    My Ride
    Hatred
    Posts
    3,608
    Rep Power
    22

    Default

    Originally posted by JfuckinC
    Haha some engineer's are pure genius, and i have nothing but respect for them. But some are such fucking retards, and they're usually the ones that hold the stereo type eng-douche persona.

    I'm just a lowly designer monkey though, so what do i know
    You can probably throw poop like a champ.
    -U

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Calgary
    My Ride
    957,958,NC1,NC3,E90,ITR
    Posts
    5,224
    Rep Power
    48

    Default

    Originally posted by Crymson
    This has already happend in in Alberta. As a Geophysicst i can't call myself a Geophysicist unless and Engineering organizaiton ordains me so.
    uh, it's your organization too...

    Association of Professional Engineers, Geologists, and Geophysicists of Alberta

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Calgary, AB
    My Ride
    955
    Posts
    1,167
    Rep Power
    20

    Default

    Originally posted by gpomp
    uh, it's your organization too...

    Association of Professional Engineers, Geologists, and Geophysicists of Alberta
    Of which the membership is 88%, 9% and 3% respectively. So it's an engineering beurocracy that decided it could force/bully the other office nerds into paying their dues.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Calgary
    My Ride
    B8.5 S4
    Posts
    1,812
    Rep Power
    22

    Default

    Anything that takes power away from APEGGA makes me

    I'm like arian-ma, an engineer that thinks the whole society/ceromony/etlitist attitude suck.

    I find it brutal that APEGGA gets to force it's membership and coresponding rediculously high membership/application/testing fees onto all of us.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    426
    Rep Power
    20

    Default

    ^ this.

    Every time I have to pay my dues, I count the number of times I have actually used/referred/benefited. Every time, clenched fist; but since the current employer reimburses me I will continue.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Calgary
    My Ride
    2009 Forester
    Posts
    276
    Rep Power
    19

    Default

    update:


    We are pleased to announce that the efforts of our members. and those of our sister societies, have had an impact. The natural science societies, with the cooperation of the PEO and the Attorney General's Office, have reached a tentative agreement with PEO for an exemption for natural scientists working in Ontario. A Joint Communique prepared by the natural science societies involved in this effort appears below. Each society will be issuing this notice to its membership as soon as possible, although, some may not be able to issue their notice until Tuesday morning.

    Francine Ford
    CAP Executive Director

    ==================

    Joint Communique (2010 September 3)

    Over the past week we, as representatives of the scientific societies listed below, have been dealing with a proposed amendment to the definition of "practice of professional engineering" in the Ontario Professional Engineers Act through the Open for Business Act, 2010 (Bill 68). This Act removes an existing exemption clause for natural scientists. A letter-writing campaign resulted in over 600 letters expressing concern about this matter being received by the Ontario Attorney General's Office. As a result of this, the Attorney-General's Office raised the matter directly with the Professional Engineers of Ontario (PEO). On September 2, 2010, a CAP-led team of representatives from CAP, ACPO, CSC, CMOS, and COMP, on behalf of the natural scientists, met with the PEO's President, Diane Freeman, and CEO/Registrar, Kim Allen, to discuss this matter.

    As a result of this discussion, an agreement in principle was reached between our societies and the PEO to introduce an exemption for natural scientists by modifying the Regulations in the Professional Engineers Act. These modifications will define a class of persons -- "Natural Scientists" -- that are exempt from being prevented by the Act from carrying out any act (including management) that requires the application of scientific principles, competently performed. The authorization for recognition of individuals that are in the category of "Natural Scientists" will reside with the respective scientific societies covered under this agreement. This agreement must still be ratified by the Councils of the various parties. Implementation of these procedures will be worked out by our respective societies as soon as possible. The Attorney General's Office of Ontario will be monitoring developments in this matter until an agreement is concluded to the satisfaction of all parties .

    The memorandum of agreement between the PEO and our societies is under review by the different groups to make sure it captured all of the points agreed to and should be finalized on Tuesday. It will be made available on our website as soon as it has been signed off by the parties involved.

    Although this issue is particular to the province of Ontario, it is potentially precedent-setting, with implications across Canada. We believe that the proposed changes will greatly strengthen the practice of natural science, and we would not have reached this point were it not for the successful letter-writing campaign and the cooperation of the PEO and the Attorney-General's Office.

    Our sincere thanks are sent to everyone who took the time to get involved. We will keep our respective communities informed of developments as they progress.

    Canadian Association of Physicists (CAP) Association of the Chemical Profession of Ontario (ACPO) Canadian Astronomical Society (CASCA) Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society (CMOS) Canadian Organization of Medical Physicists (COMP) Canadian Society for Chemistry (CSC) Chemical Institute of Canada (CIC)

    Tim

Similar Threads

  1. looking for chem 203, glgy 203, phys 223 labs

    By nagooro in forum Campus Chat
    Replies: 0
    Latest Threads: 01-24-2008, 07:20 PM
  2. 2nd year bio sci

    By <giani> in forum Campus Chat
    Replies: 3
    Latest Threads: 01-13-2008, 06:52 PM
  3. U of A Admission HELP! (Bio Sci)

    By Gondi Stylez in forum Campus Chat
    Replies: 5
    Latest Threads: 10-14-2004, 05:45 PM
  4. FS: First Year Textbooks (Math, Biol, Chem,Phys,CPSC 203) - Pics inside

    By nismodrifter in forum Miscellaneous Buy/Sell/Trade
    Replies: 14
    Latest Threads: 09-06-2004, 01:33 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •