I just got off the phone with another LS. He is looking for work but he went on to explain that he is presently doing some contract work for another company.
I asked what he was doing and he told me that he is overseeing and stamping some miscellaneous work that is being done. I asked how he was able to control the field procedures since he does not have direct control over the crew.
He said to me "that the certification is signed 'FOR AND ON THE BEHALF OF _____' thus eliminating his responsibility, because it then transfers everything over to the company"
I told him that he may want to look into this a little further and speak to the BOR and possibly an attorney, because I think differently.
Hint, Hint to BOR's
Proof that they need more professional liability questions on the LS exam.
> > He said to me "that the certification is signed 'FOR AND ON THE BEHALF OF _____' thus eliminating his responsibility, because it then transfers everything over to the company"
>
> I told him that he may want to look into this a little further and speak to the BOR and possibly an attorney, because I think differently.
I amazes me how many supposedly knowledgeable people (licensed = presumed knowledgeable) think they can so easily offload their liability even though it is their signature on a drawing or report. That takes a special kind of ignorance.
Hint, Hint to BOR's
I agree. Great suggestion!
If he is actually overseeing the work he should be fine if he is comfortable with what he is overseeing and stamps nothing he has not overseen. Liability probably not being transferred, just a possibility that company resources could be used to help defend his stamp.
jud
I've seen that recently with the "contract crew" situation we have in Florida, where PLS are rubber stamping surveys prepared by a network of crew chiefs and draftsmen that freelance to anyone ... This PLS wrote "For the Company" after his signature. I wondered if he was dumb enough to think that relieves him of accountablity.
"Responsible Professional Land Surveyor In Charge" ?
That is what your signature and seal implies.
No landowner, judge or state board would think otherwise.
Bankers and stockbrokers can steal billions of dollars and the regulatory boards seem to look the other way, but hey, get your North arrow turned the wrong way and "WHAM!".
Paul in PA
> (licensed = presumed knowledgeable)
Licensed = minimally qualified.
I was on the 2005 NCEES cut score committee for the principles exam where the knowledge base of a "minimally qualified surveyor" was defined for NCEES to use in establishing the passing score on the exam through 2012.
Lets just say that the majority's idea of "minimally qualified" was closer to my definition of "woefully unprepared". (I don't think I made a lot of friends in the room that weekend 🙁 )
Can't get away
Every state is probably a little different on their view of responsible charge. I do not believe that one could sign away the responsblity that comes with meeting the standard of ACTUALLY BEING IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE. If one insists one contracting out their services to another firm, there is nothing that prevents the parties from agreeing to indeminy, hold harmless and defend each other from liability arising from the acitivty of their contractual agreement. This is a different matter than the licensee's responsiblity to the State Board and public at large.
A few things to consider are that
1 no statement or exception can circumvent what state law says is a surveyor's responsibility
2 the surveyors responsibility is at the discretion of what the board interprets what the law says and can possibly change from time to time according to the particular group of board members.
3 one of the requirements of a surveyor is to be in responsible charge of all the work that your seal is applied to
4 ETHICS 101, read it and live it
😉
> > (licensed = presumed knowledgeable)
>
> Licensed = minimally qualified.
>
>
> Lets just say that the majority's idea of "minimally qualified" was closer to my definition of "woefully unprepared". (I don't think I made a lot of friends in the room that weekend 🙁 )
I understand and am in agreement with you there, on all counts. But minimally qualified as a professional land surveyor is still, by law and by license, a professional, which means special skill and knowledge required. Thus, licensed = presumed knowledgeable. Reality is obviously different.
The fun thing about my job is I am there at every step along the way. I do the field survey, I do the calculations, I do the determinations, I do the drafting, I cook the meals, clean the toilets, clean the showers, make the beds, there isn't any step that I am not personally involved with.
Can't get away
The way I read it, your take would OK the practice of rubberstamping for a fee. You can't contract away your professioanl liability. You stamp and sign it, you are proclaiming that you are responsible for it.
In CA, Board Rule §511(g)(3) allows licensees to stamp drawings with a notation stating which portion of the project they were responsible for, but the section also contemplates that the entirety of the responsible charge of the project will be divided or shared among all licensees signing and stamping the work. Under no circumstances does the law contemplate that there should be some portion of the responsibility constituting Responsible Charge left unassigned. Regardless of any notes stating "I'm not responsible for X" or "Some other person or entity is responsible for Y", unless some other professional is also signing and stamping for that portion of the responsibility, it all falls on the one who has signed.
And then Marc signs it?
😉
thats to bad he feels that way...
You can't certify yourself out of liability.
No, Marc won't sign my work for some reason 😉
To be fair, when I pass a project down to my employee I make him sign it even though I was physically present the whole time.
Since Colorado is a recording state, I wonder what this other surveyor is thinking about when it comes to recording the survey he signed? -Is the firm going to record it? -What if they don't?
Can't get away
No I did not say that at all. There is no way around the requirements to MEET THE STANDARD SET for a licensee by the board with regard to being in responsible charge.
I did not say that I was supporting RUBBER STAMPING. I AM DISCUSSING A totally separate matter. Surveyors and engineers and their clients enter into agreements everyday that contain indemntity clauses.....
This is going on every day across the country with big companies with far more crews than licensed surveyors taking on jobs in a wide array of locations.
