Action | Develop regulations for a mandatory continuing education requirement for architect, professional engineer, and land surveyor licenses. |
Stage | Proposed |
Comment Period | Ended on 5/2/2008 |
I’m definitely against this legislation, but I believe all licensees should be staying current in their field through selective classes of their choosing, at a pace of their choosing. We are responsible, educated and committed, as evidenced by getting our licenses in the first place.
Most professionals stay current, just to be able to do their jobs. And unless coursework is specific or at least related to their job, I would consider it pointless. All of us have been to seminars and classes which didn’t fulfill any need. (We had to go, so we could “check the box”.) How will these classes be any different? Will we simply be checking the box, while at the same time incurring unnecessary expense and inconvenience? For me, that expense will get passed on to taxpayers.
Something else to consider: Having more than one license. With my PE and LS, will I be required to attend 32 hours of training each year? I just do one job.
Finally, this legislation appears to be unnecessary, because I don’t believe any of the professions have been failing in their duties. It also puts licensees at risk for non-compliance, since it is hard to know what classes will qualify. It reminds me of the recent issue with stamps and seals, which was bureaucracy for the sake of bureaucracy.
Respectfully,
Andrew G. Miller, P.E., L.S.