We teach people how to treat us. If we conduct ourselves like we are doing something important, people will take note. If we present ourselves as a commodity, we will be treated accordingly. Being a "Professional" is as much about the way we do our work as the work itself. Merely meeting "Minimum Standards" is not the standard of a Professional.
lmbrls, post: 417790, member: 6823 wrote: We teach people how to treat us. If we conduct ourselves like we are doing something important, people will take note. If we present ourselves as a commodity, we will be treated accordingly. Being a "Professional" is as much about the way we do our work as the work itself. Merely meeting "Minimum Standards" is not the standard of a Professional.
Well said. And that's a start.
Might I also add respect is not merely a product of how others feel or perceive a person. We actually have no control of how others perceive us. Respect and professionalism is generated from within. It is a product of how we feel about ourselves. If one feels they are being disrespected that may be a scintilla of evidence that one may have doubts about oneself.
One usually misses the mark entirely when they dwell too much upon what others think.
One must satisfy themselves as to whether they are respectful and professional. If you feel you have met your own mark, others will see. Really.
I find it interesting that on this site, throughout many threads, many times in many different ways, I keep hearing comments that, "we are professionals, we are professionals" We must be a little insecure about this because if we truly believed it, folks wouldn't have to keep saying it.
This is a long subject, so I am going to narrow it down to three sentences:
1. Surveyor's today often set pin gardens, and file land survey plats showing that the existing monuments are "off" and "not accepted" by x.00 and y.00 feet, which means by definition that surveyors have no respect whatsoever for the previous generations.
2. The basic order we enjoy as a society, made possible through laws invented by three surveyors on Mount Rushmore, and many other honorable surveyors, used to be of foremost importance and respect, but is now taken completely for granted by society.
3. When I was much younger, landowners used to assume that their little bit of knowledge was superior to my training, and I spent a lot of time dealing with people showing open disrespect for some young guy who only knew how to make precise measurements, and now, with gray hair, I don't get the open disrespect any more, but, unfortunately, the title of "county surveyor" on my hat means the public despises me, as they do all county people! I am shown pure hostility not only by landowners, but by other county people - I can't imagine any lower status for such a vital function to the basic order we now take for granted.
mattb, post: 417752, member: 8629 wrote: How are surveyors treated/thought of around the world? I've heard from the elder surveyors of times when surveyors were top of the rung. Treated like true professionals. Charged the earth and won arguments. These days we seem, atleast in Australia to be much further down the heap, basically at the bottom, we answer to all the other crews. Scrambling over each other, charging pittance and treated accordingly.
What went wrong or is it just in Australia?
"charging pittance" has a GREAT deal to do with it... as does pin cushioning.
warren ward PLS CO OK, post: 417796, member: 12536 wrote: This is a long subject, so I am going to narrow it down to three sentences:
1. Surveyor's today often set pin gardens, and file land survey plats showing that the existing monuments are "off" and "not accepted" by x.00 and y.00 feet, which means by definition that surveyors have no respect whatsoever for the previous generations.
2. The basic order we enjoy as a society, made possible through laws invented by three surveyors on Mount Rushmore, and many other honorable surveyors, used to be of foremost importance and respect, but is now taken completely for granted by society.
3. When I was much younger, landowners used to assume that their little bit of knowledge was superior to my training, and I spent a lot of time dealing with people showing open disrespect for some young guy who only knew how to make precise measurements, and now, with gray hair, I don't get the open disrespect any more, but, unfortunately, the title of "county surveyor" on my hat means the public despises me, as they do all county people! I am shown pure hostility not only by landowners, but by other county people - I can't imagine any lower status for such a vital function to the basic order we now take for granted.
Constabulary personnel have always seemed to have been viewed in various forms. People will applaud the hero that drags a victim from a burning vehicle...and then cuss the same person for writing them a speeding citation. I guess as surveyors we never can get ahead in a public poll because for every property owner we help out, there is someone on the other side of the fence that feels slighted.
At least you have identified what you face. And it is accepted that the best person to fix something is he who can identify and understand what is broken.
I believe it was stated earlier and agree, it is the general public's lack of knowledge. I have taken calls telling me it shouldn't take but half an hour to do to the more common I know where on pin is so you can start there, that one pin is good by the way because they put it there. Their information comes from yahoo answers and websites explaining in detail how to do your own survey. They'll pay someone $10,000 to remodel their bathroom, but why pay us $1,000 when they can easily do it themselves.
warren ward PLS CO OK, post: 417796, member: 12536 wrote: three surveyors on Mount Rushmore
It may be my misanthropic curmudgeon nature, but I find this "three surveyors and some other guy" thing kind of tedious. Washington pretty much quit surveying as a profession by age 21; Jefferson was a dilettante who was a County Surveyor for a year and had all the work performed by his deputies, and Lincoln surveyed for three years between gigs as a failed shopkeeper and when he sat for the bar.
All told, the three didn't work long enough to qualify to sit for the exam in my state based on experience only.
James Fleming, post: 417802, member: 136 wrote: It may be my misanthropic curmudgeon nature, but I find this "three surveyors and some other guy" thing kind of tedious. Washington pretty much quit surveying as a profession by age 21; Jefferson was a dilettante who was a County Surveyor for a year and had all the work performed by his deputies, and Lincoln surveyed for three years between gigs as a failed shopkeeper and when he sat for the bar.
All told, the three didn't work long enough to qualify to sit for the exam in my state based on experience only.
That is true, and my point is that the laws they enacted, e.g. The Land Ordinance of 1785 and the Homestead Act of 1862 defined how the new United States would be first surveyed, then settled going West. Prior to the new country of the United States, Colonies enjoyed a certain order in a system of surveying that was understood and practiced by Washington, which was not adopted by the new government going west, but the fact that these men at this time in history of law making had any experience at all as surveyors was a perfect storm of luck in many ways, that in fact, are taken completely for granted. I am careful not to overshadow their obvious contributions as presidents when I talk about Mount Rushmore, but, am attempting to articulate that these men's knowledge of surveying was part of the background of where we are today. try to imaging the Continental Congress enacting new laws for expanding west, without any survey knowledge. )(PS - when I started as a surveyor in 1972, passing the test and the experience required was a tiny fraction of what is required to pass the same test today)
WA-ID Surveyor, post: 417777, member: 6294 wrote: Stop providing 'bids' would be a good start. That just makes us sound like we're trying to be the cheapest and we want you to hire us becasue we are cheap. Know what you are worth and price accordingly.
I have thought the same thing for along time but, How? It is pretty ingrained into the surveying world. Part of the education should be business training. Jp
I do agree with a lot that has been written above but I believe a minor point that has not been raised is that we have to act and appear (and deliver results of course) the part before respect is gained.
Stop going out on site in some old beat up vehicle, stop dressing like an almost homeless guy... If the first view the public has of us is scruffy, how hard to we have to work to overcome that original first impression?
On another note surveyors here 100 years ago did a lot more than surveying. They did assessments for valuations, planning, geology, forestry, etc. As each profession has become more involved, they have separated and most people only perform their own primary task and never delve into any others.
I have made a point recently to say whenever anyone asks what I do I say that I am a Registered Land Surveyor rather than "just" a surveyor.
Every little bit helps to raise the profile and respect.
Seb, that is an interesting point. As other industries/professions have come along they have stated taking on some of the roles once performed by the surveyor. On the flip side tho, other areas have taken on what should be considered the domain of the surveyor. Locally I have engineers and plumbers out bidding me for traditional surveying jobs. The perception seems to be from their point of view is that they have the gear and it's really clever gear so they can do the work and from the client's point of view they are cheaper.
My standard rate services sheet explains that I do not in any way provide estimates for low bid purposes, only as a qualifications based company. However, the majority of people I come across have to prepare a budget for their development. they get numbers from numerous subs. getting a number from a surveyor does not mean they are being disrespectful. It would be nice to just keep it open ended, but the average person can not fathom why we can't calculate a price. I for one, was surprised at how much goes into surveying, and I am a surveyor.
Seb, post: 417847, member: 7509 wrote: I do agree with a lot that has been written above but I believe a minor point that has not been raised is that we have to act and appear (and deliver results of course) the part before respect is gained.
Stop going out on site in some old beat up vehicle, stop dressing like an almost homeless guy... If the first view the public has of us is scruffy, how hard to we have to work to overcome that original first impression?
On another note surveyors here 100 years ago did a lot more than surveying. They did assessments for valuations, planning, geology, forestry, etc. As each profession has become more involved, they have separated and most people only perform their own primary task and never delve into any others.
I have made a point recently to say whenever anyone asks what I do I say that I am a Registered Land Surveyor rather than "just" a surveyor.
Every little bit helps to raise the profile and respect.
Not too long ago I was at a City Council meeting (in appropriate suit and tie, mind you) 'selling' my client's pending platting of some property. One of the councilmen with a question said, "Let's hear from the engineer". When I got to the podium I introduced myself as the Professional Surveyor on the project and noted to council I was not an engineer.
The councilman that wanted to 'hear from the engineer' asked me what the difference was between an engineer and a surveyor. In a brief I explained to him engineers couldn't supervise the platting of property, only land surveyors.
Before I could answer the real questions at hand, he quipped back that I "was wrong about that, but go ahead and answer our questions.." I had to bite my lip to keep from verbally eviscerating the tub-of-lard (trust me, I'm more than capable). The project was my main objective so ol' Paden kept his trap shut.
I got their questions answered and the plat was approved. After the meeting adjourned the same fella caught me in the hall. Apparently the Public Works Director had set him straight about land surveyors and plats. He asked me "how come it's always engineers in here with the plats?"
I told him with improvements to city infrastructure the engineer is in charge of the design, something surveyors don't do. We prepare the property lines and easements for development, but not the design. I went on to explain that there are a few engineers that are also land surveyors, but generally the engineer doing the song-and-dance in front of council probably wasn't the surveyor that prepared the plat. He apologized for telling me I "was wrong" and I accepted his apology.
Do I still think he's a pompous tub-of-lard? Certainly, but at least he now knows the difference.
An aside to the conversation is that often surveyors are dismissive of other professions and industries and even to each other.
I for one will do my part by never again referring to a architect as a artichoke.:grinning:
Paden, I'm trying to picture you rolling up to a council meeting in a suit and tie on a your motorcycle :). Jp
James Fleming, post: 417802, member: 136 wrote: It may be my misanthropic curmudgeon nature, but I find this "three surveyors and some other guy" thing kind of tedious.
I have said pretty much the same thing here. All of those three surveyed as sort of a side gig while waiting for something better to come along. But therein lies the problem. You can't really point to the Professional Land Surveyor who has gone on to slay a dragon, defeat our enemies on the field of battle, cure cancer, etc. etc.
Jp7191, post: 417876, member: 1617 wrote: Paden, I'm trying to picture you rolling up to a council meeting in a suit and tie on a your motorcycle :). Jp
I've actually been around town in my good duds a few times on the bikes. But 2 good reasons that's a no-no: I get beat to death with my Jerry Garcia ties and my sports jacket blows all over the place (I'm too portly to button it and sit on a scooter) and I don't want my $400 eye-talyun slippers to get rubbed on by the gear shift selector.
BTW - just to put it in perspective...I have ridden a bike up to the shop wearing my jammies (sweatpants and a t-shirt) and my wore out bedroom slippers. I don't even think my hair was combed...I bet I looked a sight. 😉
Jp7191, post: 417876, member: 1617 wrote: Paden, I'm trying to picture you rolling up to a council meeting in a suit and tie on a your motorcycle
I have seen Paden in his suit. He cleans up fairly well.
RPLS#, post: 417784, member: 12280 wrote: I'm curious on your thoughts Kent on how working for engineering companies degrades the profession. Can you expand on that?
As a general rule, engineering firms have a surveying department to either (a) support land development projects that they provide engineering services on or (b) to perform engineering surveying in support of engineering projects. It's a kick-the-project-out-the-door orientation that is only marginally focused on actual land surveying as defined in Texas and then only when necessary.
The large engineering firms tend to be sausage factories with many hands running the grinder, all set in motion by engineering staff, if under the nominal direction of some registered surveyor whose work mostly requires him or her to hold down a desk and telephone. I suspect that the young surveyors who graduate from that work environment tend to accept that model or style of practice as a given and to perpetuate it in their own offices.
