@jph Not joking.?ÿ And my comment has nothing to do with unlicensed practice, or requirements for licensure.?ÿ I'm talking about liability.
The more money you have invested in something, the more value you place on it.?ÿ I've always thought that was a good argument for requiring a degree.?ÿ A degree would do more for increasing the income of the profession than anything else while protecting the public from low balling practitioners.
@jph Okay, to make it simple, lets say there is no license requirement.?ÿ You prepare a map and tell the owner it represents the boundary.?ÿ It goes to court and the court sides with someone else.?ÿ You are now liable for damages.
On the other hand, there is a license requirement.?ÿ You prepare a map and tell the owner it represents the boundary. It goes to court and the court sides with someone else.?ÿ You are not liable.?ÿ You are entitled to your professional opinion.?ÿ The owner would have to prove you were professionally negligent in preparing the opinion.
For high liability work in construction industry, (or even more protection against professional negligence in boundary work).?ÿ No license, then you would be a contractor that would need to post bond.?ÿ With license you are a professional and may need professional liability insurance but generally much cheaper and easier than posting a bond.
Thanks for that.?ÿ But I definitely haven't been arguing for doing away with licenses
I earned professional status through education, experience, and exams. My license is governed under the law by my peers under standards developed and maintained by a body of professionals. Most of my work involves well reasoned judgments dependent on complex fact patterns. A trade on the other hand is generally learned through experience and governed by a guild or union. Most of thier work is governed by rigid codes and basic principles.?ÿ
Words mean stuff. You can operate as a tradesman if you like, but that means career technician, not surveyor. Nothing to be ashamed of, but not a surveyor.
As for pay, if you are working the hours of a tradesman and making less, look in the mirror. I don't know a single motivated licensed surveyor in the private sector making less than six figures UNLESS it's by choice.
I'm tired of arguing, but it's semantics.?ÿ?ÿ In my opinion nothing that has been said really points to a degree requirement being a necessity - it's all been lofty ideals, inflated opinions, and over-compensating.?ÿ You obviously feel otherwise.?ÿ
There is always next year.?ÿ
So...umm... How's 2022 going for everything so far?
Busier than a billy goat in a pen full of nannies.
I've news for you, Joe.?ÿ The trades are paying more than the surveying profession
I know full well what the salaries of surveyors are statistically.?ÿ That statistic is what it is because of surveyors not charging enough or not demanding enough from their employer.?ÿ My comment was that we should be paid like professionals, not like tradesmen.?ÿ Bringing up what we are paid now doesn't negate what I said.?ÿ We should be paid like professionals.
I would not settle for less than I am worth, and I wouldn't be in surveying if I was being paid like I'm in a trade.?ÿ I want to see more surveyors getting paid what they deserve, and that includes the tradesmen/survey crew out playing frogger in the road and getting stung by yellow jackets.?ÿ
I see a lot of survey outfits whose business model is to have a lot of crews and the company makes its money by doing a lot of work quickly for little money, and the only guy who gets paid well is the owner (if he's lucky.)?ÿ This is sad to see.?ÿ They could charge twice as much but don't.
A survey from a licensed surveyor is something someone gets because they need it, not because they have money burning a hole in their pocket.?ÿ If surveyors charged what their work was worth, then they would be paid more, and people would still pay for surveys. It shouldn't cost more to get 3 cords of wood for the season than it costs to have a professional survey done on a half-million-dollar commercial property in the same area.?ÿ I think the wood guy charges what he is worth, and surveyors should start doing the same.
?ÿ
?ÿ
I see a lot of survey outfits whose business model is to have a lot of crews and the company makes its money by doing a lot of work quickly for little money, and the only guy who gets paid well is the owner (if he's lucky.)?ÿ This is sad to see.?ÿ They could charge twice as much but don't.
?ÿ
I've seen firms in CA which historically relied so much upon billing the thousands of crew hours accumulated for construction jobs have issues because this model of revenue is dramatically decreasing due to the advancement in technologies.?ÿ Its not a good business model to base a majority of your revenue on.
Not sure who, if anyone here has been promoting deregulation, but it wasn't me.?ÿ
My bad, I thought you mentioned something about being okay with surveying being a trade instead of a profession.?ÿ That's what I was commenting on.?ÿ Maybe I misunderstood.
There's been a lot of dick swinging and thread drift here but I'll put in my 2? anyway.
I've been almost everywhere in the business from $2.60/hr crew to the 6 figure senior principal on a salary.?ÿ We can niggle over appropriate wages but no matter a person's official title I treat my coworkers as compatriots,?ÿ mentor the newbies, listen to my superiors, but not afraid to learn from the long term field guys and I'd disagree with my superiors if I thought?ÿ I was right.
I've worked with lots of Survey Degree college kids that were well versed concerning the technical end including boundary aspects like PLSS, boundary resolution, etc., well worth hiring and productive from the get-go.?ÿ Also worked with 50 year old party chiefs who've never filed a survey but were top notch boundary recovery experts and construction surveyors.?ÿ Unfortunately, people are people and the contrary may be shown.
I'm not sure what my thesis is here, but I've never judged coworkers by their job title, annual income, age or appearance.?ÿ Just by their performance, integrity and willingness to be mentored or mentor me.?ÿ That's a healthy work situation to be in and was my mantra during my 45 year career.?ÿ If you don't like where you are wage/personal development-wise?ÿ look around for a better situation where you are respected and provided with a career path.
@dmyhill?ÿ
Nah... I'd rather not have to take separate tests for: boundary; grade level construction; topographic mapping; scanning; high rise construction; riparian; railroad; industrial metrology; etc...
@dmyhill I agree.?ÿ Several other registered professions are essentially multi-discipline, where aspects of their core responsibilities require it.?ÿ Civil engineers, where structural, hydrologic, hydraulic, seismic and water treatment analysis are just a few disciplines involved in holding that license; MD (too many to list); Architects are allowed to certify structural and energy efficiency calculations and topographic maps.?ÿ Most state descriptions of these professions have a clause regarding "area of competency" (or similar wording) in order to have a foothold in assuring credibility in the courtroom and to give the professional a sense of their personal obligations and liabilities.?ÿ I think having the various, distinct disciplines in land surveying allow those who love to learn and expand, more easily become masters in their area of interest where testing through or requiring formal coursework would likely limit some of the best.
@dmyhill?ÿ
Nah... I'd rather not have to take separate tests for: boundary; grade level construction; topographic mapping; scanning; high rise construction; riparian; railroad; industrial metrology; etc...
@dmyhill I agree.?ÿ Several other registered professions are essentially multi-discipline, where aspects of their core responsibilities require it.?ÿ Civil engineers, where structural, hydrologic, hydraulic, seismic and water treatment analysis are just a few disciplines involved in holding that license; MD (too many to list); Architects are allowed to certify structural and energy efficiency calculations and topographic maps.?ÿ Most state descriptions of these professions have a clause regarding "area of competency" (or similar wording) in order to have a foothold in assuring credibility in the courtroom and to give the professional a sense of their personal obligations and liabilities.?ÿ I think having the various, distinct disciplines in land surveying allow those who love to learn and expand, more easily become masters in their area of interest where testing through or requiring formal coursework would likely limit some of the best.
Yep, I like that licensed land surveying is a generalist ticket and we are able to practice in wide ranging specialties.?ÿ They're all founded on the fact we are the authority on locating and interpreting points on the Earth on a State by State basis considering Statutes and also nationwide can do supertight local location services.?ÿ That being said I considered myself an expert on boundary, topographic, construction, being the "bad guy" on multimillion dollar GIS efforts, and limited geodetic surveying.
The key is in our license, do not engage in areas where you are not competant. I've never touched drones, scanner technology, underground mining, metrology and other stuff I know nothing about.?ÿ Not that they were off limits but I just didn't have the time/resources to feel good about offering such services.
@jph?ÿ
I am beginning to think we have a fundamental disagreement about what land surveyors do. A measuring engineer probably does not need a four year degree. A drafting technician certainly doesn't. Someone who reads a deed, and marks it on the ground and calls it good doesn't either, but that is not what most of us are doing anymore.?ÿ
@dmyhill?ÿ
Nah... I'd rather not have to take separate tests for: boundary; grade level construction; topographic mapping; scanning; high rise construction; riparian; railroad; industrial metrology; etc...
@dmyhill I agree.?ÿ Several other registered professions are essentially multi-discipline, where aspects of their core responsibilities require it.?ÿ Civil engineers, where structural, hydrologic, hydraulic, seismic and water treatment analysis are just a few disciplines involved in holding that license; MD (too many to list); Architects are allowed to certify structural and energy efficiency calculations and topographic maps.?ÿ Most state descriptions of these professions have a clause regarding "area of competency" (or similar wording) in order to have a foothold in assuring credibility in the courtroom and to give the professional a sense of their personal obligations and liabilities.?ÿ I think having the various, distinct disciplines in land surveying allow those who love to learn and expand, more easily become masters in their area of interest where testing through or requiring formal coursework would likely limit some of the best.
Yep, I like that licensed land surveying is a generalist ticket and we are able to practice in wide ranging specialties.?ÿ They're all founded on the fact we are the authority on locating and interpreting points on the Earth on a State by State basis considering Statutes and also nationwide can do supertight local location services.?ÿ That being said I considered myself an expert on boundary, topographic, construction, being the "bad guy" on multimillion dollar GIS efforts, and limited geodetic surveying.
The key is in our license, do not engage in areas where you are not competant. I've never touched drones, scanner technology, underground mining, metrology and other stuff I know nothing about.?ÿ Not that they were off limits but I just didn't have the time/resources to feel good about offering such services.
To be clear, my idea would be to offer ADDITIONAL meaningful certifications.?ÿ
@dmyhill Exactly. Breaking the existing exam into modules doesn't increase the effort. It simply opens the door for experts in narrow areas of practice. Some of those areas justify a professional credential. As disciplines of surveying a PLS license makes sense. The current licensing scheme locks them out.