Beyond the legal and ethical questions... I would wonder why any surveyor would do business with a company or a manufacturer that is in essence competing against the same customers that they are selling high dollar equipment to. Personally I'd be pretty ticked off to buy a 100k machine only to lose a bid or a contract because the dealer, which makes a fortune selling this equipment can do it cheaper.
It should be illegal, it is unethical. Surveyors need to support those dealers out there that are there for the profession, willing to help and willing to go the extra mile. There isn't too many left. Now it's all about the quick sale.
How should a dealer sell scanners?
Should they put a $50k scanner in the backroom and wait for you to call?
Should they build a $150k+ mobile scanner and wait for you to need to buy?
Should they invest in Tens of Thousands in software and computer hardware and even more in training so they can train you to deal with the data, and then sit there and stare at their screen and wait for your call? (While making their payments on their seats each year for their software.)
Should they shrug their shoulders when you ask, "How do I do this?, Can I make money with this thing?"
In our area, there is a firm called Centerpoint, they are both a survey firm and a purveyor of scanning equipment. They are very up front about who they are, and are qualified to do everything you want, including boundary.
Also, there is a firm called PPI, and they were written up in a recent survey mag. The guy that they have running their equipment knows what he is doing, and he knows the boundaries of what he should and shouldn't do regarding surveying. The scans we did with them involved the presence of the appropriate personnel from our firm to fulfill the direct supervision requirement.
Are they competing with us? Maybe, but our feeling is that they would love nothing more than for us to buy the equipment and be doing the work ourselves. We just do not believe that the return is there for us, yet.
IMHO we should all be happy that someone who is basically in our camp, is willing to own the expensive equipment and enable us to find out how to make this work.
I have rented the mobile scanner in question from Adam at Earl Dudley & Associates. Dmyhill is right on with his comment. They would love to sell the equipment, but nobody is buying. So they rent it out or go do a scan for folks to show what it can do. They have to eat, so they charge a fee to do it. When mobile scanning really catches on, they will get out of the scanning service business and back to selling the equipment. I'll say this as well: when this stuff really catches on, it will be the end of traditional roadway surveys. You will still need to go out and pick up ROW and utility locations, but the topo will be scanned.
Why? Construction work has no such requirement. Just sayin. Make a case for only surveyors being allowed to use the technology. It's a tough sell from my discussions with legislators.
What seems to be happening is that large area mapping is being validated by smaller verification testing areas. Once the technology has been proven by this QA/QC process, it then becomes acceptable for general use.
Of course things can go wrong, but they can go wrong with a licensed professional in charge also. This is the argument I'm faced with when meeting with those that make the laws.
So, their question and mine is what does the surveyor add specifically to the process when the technology has already been vetted?
I have lots of answers, and so do others, but we don't seem to be convincing those with control over the issue.
> Why? Construction work has no such requirement. Just sayin. Make a case for only surveyors being allowed to use the technology. It's a tough sell from my discussions with legislators.
>
> What seems to be happening is that large area mapping is being validated by smaller verification testing areas. Once the technology has been proven by this QA/QC process, it then becomes acceptable for general use.
>
> Of course things can go wrong, but they can go wrong with a licensed professional in charge also. This is the argument I'm faced with when meeting with those that make the laws.
>
> So, their question and mine is what does the surveyor add specifically to the process when the technology has already been vetted?
>
> I have lots of answers, and so do others, but we don't seem to be convincing those with control over the issue.
As I mentioned before it is specifically written into the contract, so it appears that some State and Private agencies are of the impression that Surveyors are still the experts when it comes to measuring science.
Ralph
Since none of us were there, we don't really know what happened. If I was really worried about being paid I would demand full payment up-front. It is simply not my place to collect or demand payment for anyone else. Now if I was using the other companies data or files, then I can see a reason to be sure they were paid.
When it comes to construction layout, the contractor assumes responsibility when they use their in-house crews. The final locations will have to verified by a Licensed Surveyor.
Ralph
id also be mad but at the client, not for another surveyor doing their job. Why should I be upset at the surveyor who just did me a huge favor? Getting rid of bad clients is a blessing. I keep good clients and fire bad ones. I can file a lien against the property and that takes all of 2 months...So far that has gotten me paid every time. I certainly would warn the other surveyor if I hadnt got paid...but be mad at someone for trying to earn a living? no, I will still buy you a beer!
> id also be mad but at the client, not for another surveyor doing their job. Why should I be upset at the surveyor who just did me a huge favor? Getting rid of bad clients is a blessing. I keep good clients and fire bad ones. I can file a lien against the property and that takes all of 2 months...So far that has gotten me paid every time. I certainly would warn the other surveyor if I hadnt got paid...but be mad at someone for trying to earn a living? no, I will still buy you a beer!
I think it's best that you stay in NC and I stay in NYC, we're worlds apart.
Ralph
> Why? Construction work has no such requirement. Just sayin. Make a case for only surveyors being allowed to use the technology. It's a tough sell from my discussions with legislators.
>
Making a case for Surveyors only using technology is not the issue. Anybody can go out and buy a scanner or a total station or gps unit and use it as they please. But in the eyes of the Angencies/client who can they sue, I guess.
I'm all for free markets and if I have to reinvent myself, I have no problem. I was on a project where I became Super/Proj Mgr/Proj Engineer and Chief Surveyor, so I can wear many different hats and still use the technology competently.
Ralph
Ralph
What you describe is called corrupt combination, collusion, or conspiracy in restraint of trade.
> Ralph
>
> What you describe is called corrupt combination, collusion, or conspiracy in restraint of trade.
>
>> http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/corrupt-combination-collusion-or-conspiracy-in-restraint-of-trade.htmlbr >
I doubt that would ever hold any water in a court of law.
Ralph
From a previous post on supplanting:
You may find the word supplant on this link and find its use interesting.
http://www.ncarb.org/~/media/Files/PDF/Mini-Monographs/EthicsConductMM.pdf
Here is another, somewhat dated, citation.
> From a previous post on supplanting:
>
> You may find the word supplant on this link and find its use interesting.
>
>> http://www.ncarb.org/~/media/Files/PDF/Mini-Monographs/EthicsConductMM.pdf
>
> Here is another, somewhat dated, citation.
>
>> http://www.profsurv.com/magazine/article.aspx?i=429br >
One article of the Pennsylvania statutory code of ethics on which I have relied many a time is the restraint on reviewing another surveyor's work without his or her knowledge before his or her services have been terminated. I have informed those who asked me about another surveyor's work that I am legally bound to contact the surveyor. I have also notified other surveyors who I learned had been contacted about work I was doing that they were obliged to withhold services until my contract was fulfilled.
A surreptitious review of another surveyor's work usually entails the breach of other restraints as well: the restraint from supplanting another surveyor after he or she has already been engaged, the restraint on making excessive claims about oneself or assertions that are injurious to another surveyor, and the restraint on undercharging. Not all of these restraints apply at once, although in egregious cases more than one applies.
Some Ethical Principles Illegal
Imagine my surprise on learning that these articles are technically illegal! They violate the Sherman Antitrust Act and the mandates of the Federal Trade Commission because they can be construed as restraint of free trade.
Awesome Richard,
Thanks for the link, I guess we'll always be stuck with this dilemma. Based on what I read it would seem every single tenet on those Canons are bordering on illegal.
It's good food for thought.
Thanks for the article
Ralph
Don't you think someone will do that job Ralph? It is obvious from the discussion here, that much of the canons of ethics written to force ethical behavior on the surveying profession are actually immoral and some have been proven illegal. After all a contract between 2 individuals is between them and has nothing to do with anyone else. The moral thing to do is judge for yourself what your business does and let others make their own choices. In almost all contract disputes, both sides think they are right. I stay out of those issues and just take care of my business. I am not saying I would even take a job, under this circumstance but if I thought the job was profitable and the risk worth it, I probably would. Ahh NYC, the bastion of ethical and moral altruism in an otherwise corrupt world...
> Don't you think someone will do that job Ralph? It is obvious from the discussion here, that much of the canons of ethics written to force ethical behavior on the surveying profession are actually immoral and some have been proven illegal. After all a contract between 2 individuals is between them and has nothing to do with anyone else. The moral thing to do is judge for yourself what your business does and let others make their own choices. In almost all contract disputes, both sides think they are right. I stay out of those issues and just take care of my business. I am not saying I would even take a job, under this circumstance but if I thought the job was profitable and the risk worth it, I probably would. Ahh NYC, the bastion of ethical and moral altruism in an otherwise corrupt world...
Who said they were immoral??
Ahh NYC, the bastion of ethical and moral altruism in an otherwise corrupt world...
I'll refrain from commenting on that for now, but what do you know about NYC?? Have you ever been here? Have you ever worked here?
Ralph
