# P. Eng. - Worth it?



## HackNSlash (Apr 3, 2009)

Hey all,

I'm a Computer Engineer and have been working for ~5 years now in a semiconductors company called Altera. It recently dawned on me that I'm now eligible to apply for my P. Eng. Now the thing is, a P. Eng. is really important career-wise for Mechanical Engineers and such, but less so for Computer Engineers (if we make a mistake, people don't usually die...), so many of my colleagues never bothered getting theirs. The only thing that would make it worthwhile is the apparent insurance savings you get from being a P. Eng, but I don't know exactly how much you'd save and whether that would beat the yearly licensing fee (~$250, apparently)

So my question is, is anyone a Comp or Elec Engineer out there who has their P. Eng.? If so, why did you get it, and was it worth it?

I suspect FrugalTrader might even be able to jump in here. I vaguely recall he's an engineer of some sort...


----------



## steve41 (Apr 18, 2009)

When I graduated in EE, there was no such animal as computer engineer. I never bothered to get my P.Eng, and I don't think I regret it. I guess Civils, Chemicals and Mechanicals would benefit, but Electricals.... not so much.


----------



## iherald (Apr 18, 2009)

Personally I'd like to be a P.Eng if possible. Why don't you see if your company will pay your yearly fee?


----------



## OhGreatGuru (May 24, 2009)

From a professional development point of view, I would recommend it. It will increase your employment opportunities and status in your profession.

P.Eng associations are trying to get a handle on people who call themselves "computer engineers/software engineers" without being P.Engs. In some provinces anyone engaged in the "practice of engineering" comes under the authority of the Engineers' Act, so the Associations are taking steps to prevent anyone advertising themselves as an engineer when they are not licensed. It is a work in progress with repect to computer engineering, but you may as well get ahead of the game if you are qualified to become licensed.


----------



## daddybigbucks (Jan 30, 2011)

OhGreatGuru said:


> From a professional development point of view, I would recommend it. It will increase your employment opportunities and status in your profession.
> 
> P.Eng associations are trying to get a handle on people who call themselves "computer engineers/software engineers" without being P.Engs. In some provinces anyone engaged in the "practice of engineering" comes under the authority of the Engineers' Act, so the Associations are taking steps to prevent anyone advertising themselves as an engineer when they are not licensed. It is a work in progress with repect to computer engineering, but you may as well get ahead of the game if you are qualified to become licensed.


Then there will also be Power Engineers and Train Engineers that have along longer than the P.eng. designation.


----------



## slacker (Mar 8, 2010)

What about software engineers ?


----------



## el oro (Jun 16, 2009)

My employer pays the annual fee and you can't advance beyond a certain pay-grade without the designation. The cheap insurance is definitely worth asking your employer if they would pay for the fee.


----------



## HackNSlash (Apr 3, 2009)

Can anyone with their P. Eng. quantify what kind of insurance discounts you get with it? I'm an engineer. I like numbers


----------



## el oro (Jun 16, 2009)

Give TD Meloche Monnex a call and get a quote assuming you get the APEGGA/PEO/etc. discount. I can't remember what the % savings was but I believe it was substantial.

There are a few people on this thread that have it:
http://forums.redflagdeals.com/car-insurance-how-much-do-you-pay-502899/25/

Also, apparently the annual fee is tax deductible if your employer doesn't cover it.


----------



## Karen (Jul 24, 2010)

If I remember correectly, carverman is an electrical engineer. Maybe he'll chime in with his opinion on this question.


----------



## leoc2 (Dec 28, 2010)

I was a PEng when I worked in industry as an electrical engineer. I let my membership expire when I started teaching at a community college. It was a matter of letting my career path dictate the need for the PEng.

The insurance discounts came from Meloche Monnex. They allowed me to stay in the discount group for home/car policies. They refunded my premiums for life insurance and kicked me out. No big deal... found another broker. You can go online to request a quote so that you can quantify the discount amount.


----------



## bbsj (Aug 26, 2010)

It is a good idea to obtain P. Eng. designation if you are eligible, and it is important to maintain your designation once you get it. In an uncertain world qualifications and credentials are very valuable assets and they may help you restart life anywhere. Further, rules may change and you may not get it back in the future if you do not maintain your status. As an example, professors in engineering faculties were encouraged, but not required to have a P. Eng. Now one has to have a P. Eng. to teach engineering courses, and tenure can not be granted in Canada without a P. Eng. for engineering faculty. It may come to community colleges for those teaching engineering courses.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

$1600 Gold by 2011 said:


> Give TD Meloche Monnex a call and get a quote assuming you get the APEGGA/PEO/etc. discount. I can't remember what the % savings was but I believe it was substantial.
> 
> There are a few people on this thread that have it:
> http://forums.redflagdeals.com/car-insurance-how-much-do-you-pay-502899/25/
> ...


I'm a mechanical.
The insurance discount through MM as a P.Eng was about 5% less than through MM with my alumni discount.
My alumni discount was about 15% less than what I was paying through non-group insurance.
My employer pays my license fee, and it is tax deducatable in any case. 

SO if I paid, and I am considering vs the MM alumni rate, it's within a few dollars a year of breaking even.

Going forward, over the next several decades, I'd expect the regulatory environment to change.


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

I applied as soon as I could. I was an Engineering Physicist. I worked at automating a chemical plant in Sarnia at the time. I eventually switched from being an engineer to being in Marketing but kept my designation. It was useful for signing Passport application. But I never used my stamp. I had the cheap term life insurance during my peak earning years. I used the the P. Eng. designation after my name and on job applications.

I would not hesitate to do it again. It is more about associating with members of your profession and their meetings and education. And it is deductible.

I gave it up after I had been retired for 5 years.


----------



## Causalien (Apr 4, 2009)

The insurance is the only benefit I see from being a P.ENG. Then again, if your work doesn't pay for it, the cost of membership is more than the savings you get.

You also get better interest rate with CIBC when you get a loan from them. 
Neither of these justifies the fee for P.ENG for me. Definitely go for it as a junior P.ENG since the fees are lower.


----------



## MoneyGal (Apr 24, 2009)

It's deductible in Line 212 of your tax return: http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/ndvdls/tpcs/ncm-tx/rtrn/cmpltng/ddctns/lns206-236/212/menu-eng.html

(Just providing more detail)

I don't know what kind of insurance people are talking about here - MM is only property and car - but typically the bigger savings are on group life insurance.


----------



## leoc2 (Dec 28, 2010)

MoneyGal said:


> It's deductible in Line 212 of your tax return: ...
> I don't know what kind of ins...panies/melochemonnexlifeinsurance/"]link says MM offers life insurance. Perhaps life insurance was stopped when TD bought them?


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

MoneyGal said:


> I don't know what kind of insurance people are talking about here - MM is only property and car - but typically the bigger savings are on group life insurance.


Yes I carried their reducing term until I turned 65. Because it is based on Engineers' longevity, there are considerable saving because this group lives longer than average.

It is offered by Manulife.


----------



## Plugging Along (Jan 3, 2011)

My husband is a software 'engineer', and has an eletrical engineering technologist designation (not APPEGA, but ASET). He's been doing this for about 15 years, and has a masters in Computer Science too. 

Because he is a member of ASET, he does already get the same discounts for insurance as APEGGA. The savings seem decent, I think it was about 20%, but I haven't confirmed.

In terms of career wise, he has decided not get the P. Eng designation, as it does not help in software engineering. For the work he does, there is absolutely no reason that he needs to P. Eng stamp. Also, is in consulting, which the more letters you have behind your name, usually the better, and he found the P. Eng for him does not make a difference. 

In terms of teaching, he is actually looking at teaching at the the post secondary institutes here, and a P. Eng is not required, because he would be teaching in the Computer Science faculty, not Engineering (which you would need a P. Eng). 

If you're company pays for it, then there is a really no harm, but if they don't pay for it, that is another indication of how much value they see in it.


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

My company did not pay for it because they did not need it but I felt it was worthwhile and it is pretty cheap.


----------



## Plugging Along (Jan 3, 2011)

Sorry, that's what I meant. If a company isn't willing to pay for it, it can be an indication that it is not a requirement for the job or future positions. Especially in the case of the OP who is in computers, not traditional engineering, I am not sure it will provide much benefit in terms of career advancement.


----------



## iherald (Apr 18, 2009)

Plugging Along said:


> Sorry, that's what I meant. If a company isn't willing to pay for it, it can be an indication that it is not a requirement for the job or future positions. Especially in the case of the OP who is in computers, not traditional engineering, I am not sure it will provide much benefit in terms of career advancement.


It may be wise to contact a headhunter and ask their opinion too. Whether one company requires or rewards it is one thing, but the headhunter will know industry standards.


----------



## Plugging Along (Jan 3, 2011)

My husband asked a few headhunters, and pretty much the consensus was in the IT field, it wouldn't hurt, but wouldn't help. However, they did say if he wanted to pursue his electrical engineering it would be a good idea.


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

Membership comes with a monthly magazine and education programs and local chapter meetings. If these bring value to you then it might be worthwhile. They are good networking opportunities, not a typical strength for engineers. If not, you can always suspend the membership. It is easy to reinstate.


----------



## doctrine (Sep 30, 2011)

Software and computer engineers that make medical equipment would disagree with your assumption that people can't die because of computers. In fact, computer/software engineers will often study such cases in the course of their degree program. People have and will continue to die as the result of improper software. And it's not just medical. Think of all of the modelling software out there that is done for structures and transportation. Everything is being controlled by electronics; do you really want some joe off the street to be programming your airplane's control system that keeps the airframe stable while in flight?
</rant>

PEng is extremely useful in industry. If you're designing a web page with flashy lights, trying to be the next twitter/facebook, not so critical.


----------



## Atlasjq (Sep 13, 2011)

I am a P.Eng who works primarily in IT as a Project Manager/Business Analyst. I also do Project Management in the Industrial Construction sector. My background is in Electrical/Computer.

My opinion is that in IT it is not a requirement.... yet. It certainly will give you a great deal of technical credibility when speaking to technical people on IT projects but its not yet recognized as a valuable industry certification like PMP or CCNA etc.

The caveat being that I believe the engineering profession as a whole is going to extend their influence over computer and IT applications in the next ten years. In the healthcare sector the failure of a piece of software could have dramatic impacts on patient care even today so why are these projects not signed off by a P.Eng who takes professional (and legal) responsibility for the design of the system?

The joke I've heard is if you look to the front of an Engineering Specification you see a stamp and a signature but on the front of an IT Specification you see a disclaimer.

Good luck!


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

Atlasjq said:


> The caveat being that I believe the engineering profession as a whole is going to extend their influence over computer and IT applications in the next ten years. In the healthcare sector the failure of a piece of software could have dramatic impacts on patient care even today so why are these projects not signed off by a P.Eng who takes professional (and legal) responsibility for the design of the system?


The P Eng associations have been trying to influence IT projects for 30 years. The fact is that, unless a P Eng stamp is a requirement of the project, it will never happen. Also most IT projects lack a rigorous design phase where a P Eng would be of most value.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Do software engineers ever actually certify anything? I can't see them stamping anything, as it is very difficult to guarantee bug-free code. Same goes for industrial engineers.


----------



## leoc2 (Dec 28, 2010)

kcowan said:


> The P Eng associations have been trying to influence IT projects for 30 years. The fact is that, unless a P Eng stamp is a requirement of the project, it will never happen. Also most IT projects lack a rigorous design phase where a P Eng would be of most value.


I think the PEng Stamp of approval which is a quantitative verification of procedures and materials to ensure safety of the public makes sense in assuring the safety of electro-mechanical systems. I think it is very difficult to approve a system being controlled by software. Who has the time or will be able to review/police the safety of a system that uses thousands of lines of code? Perhaps we can start a CSA type company that reviews the safety of software? We would need to be paid per hour as it would be time consuming and arduous task. On second thought maybe not  hmmmm


----------



## Atlasjq (Sep 13, 2011)

I think with the growing potential impact on public safety it is inevitable that Engineering will have oversight over the IT field, no matter how arduous the transition may be.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

I don't think software is amenable to being 'stamped'. Only safety-critical applications tend to get this treatment, and those represent a vanishingly small percentage of the code in existence. Microsoft Windows is never going to get an engineer's stamp of approval. The cost would be untenable.


----------



## Atlasjq (Sep 13, 2011)

I don't think you will see an entire application get stamped by one engineer. Much like you don't have a single stamp to cover an entire building. You will see stamps from Civil, Mechanical, Electrical, Structural, etc covering various subsystems within the building. Software applications and other modern technologies can be broken down into logical sub-components that have some form of oversight/responsibility from a design perspective. 

It didn't start out that Engineers were required to stamp designs either. It took a great deal of evolution and time before it became a necessity (Quebec Bridge, for example). It will need to be required by industry or government before it happens in IT but it is inevitable. Someday some application will fail and people will be hurt and it will have been preventable and that will be the catalyst for change.


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

I think the Y2K certification of software is a good example. When the code was written, few did the extra required to make the software work over the millennium. The people paying for the software were never given the choice. Yet that has not resulted in any more stringent certification.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Perhaps for a very narrow range of applications. I don't see how an engineer is supposed to guarantee software. You can't just overspec it like you can with physical structures. Even very carefully inspected code has bugs. You can use static code analysis, but even that has serious limitations.


----------



## loggedout (Dec 30, 2009)

I started out in EE, mainly involved in industrial automation work where I've worked on "safety critical software", and then moved on to doing safety analysis work in the nuclear industry. I really haven't seen any obvious advantages to having a P. Eng., so I have not gone for mine. That, and I regret my entire career choice.....I think managers may need the stamp to "seal" documents and drawings but I don't see any difference in the work I get or don't get due to not having a P. Eng., or are any incentives tied to pay. I guess it could make a small difference when looking for work but I really don't know.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

andrewf said:


> Perhaps for a very narrow range of applications. I don't see how an engineer is supposed to guarantee software. You can't just overspec it like you can with physical structures. Even very carefully inspected code has bugs. You can use static code analysis, but even that has serious limitations.


Even carefully designed physical structures can have design flaws or quality defects, which is conceptually similar to software bugs. 

Proper engineering practice should limit those flaws in all types of systems.

There are standards for proper design of safety related systems, just like their are standards for bridges.


----------



## steve41 (Apr 18, 2009)

Who remembers the old saying....

"Before I got my P.Eng, I couldn't even spell ENGINEER, now I are one"?


----------



## jamesbe (May 8, 2010)

MrMatt said:


> Even carefully designed physical structures can have design flaws or quality defects, which is conceptually similar to software bugs.
> 
> Proper engineering practice should limit those flaws in all types of systems.
> 
> There are standards for proper design of safety related systems, just like their are standards for bridges.


It would cost far too much and take too much time for software, resulting in delays and missed market opportunities.

There is a reason software has bugs LOL


----------



## Plugging Along (Jan 3, 2011)

Even if you could go through and stamp software, there is no gaurentee against failures. If the hardware changes or one of the interfaces changes, there could still be failures. 

Would recertify every change? There are standards in development, and ITIL standards, you could says that it mets those standards, but even then there is no gaurentee.


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

steve41 said:


> "Before I got my P.Eng, I couldn't even spell ENGINEER, now I are one"?


And god help you if you call yourself an "engineer" without permission. IBM got into a lot of trouble with their systems engineers who weren't.


----------



## jamesbe (May 8, 2010)

They call me a software test engineer. I'm not an engineer, and neither are any of my colleagues.


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

Yes I think the way around it was that the company never represented them as engineers. That got tested when they were in the consulting business, and I think the never claimed any of their people were operating as engineers, in fact, they focused on project management.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

It's like all the 'architects' you get in software. Designer is not grandiose enough to stroke egos, I suppose.


----------

