[BC] State Licensing

[Robert Meuser]

I've seen this go down before. It is pretty easy to use a substitute for the word 
engineer to avoid such issues. You just seem to be sour grapes for no really good reason.


R



On 20 May 2005 at 9:53, Mario Hieb, P.E. wrote:

> It has less to do with the FCC and more to do with what other professional 
> societies are doing.
> 
> There are people out there who don't want you to use the title "engineer" 
> unless you are licensed. Their argument is that there are life, safety and 
> property issues at stake, and they have a point. These groups are large, 
> powerful, well-funded and well-connected. SBE could easily get squeezed out 
> of business, unless it gets proactive.
> 
> State licensing would be messy, yes, but may be the best way (and possibly 
> the only way) to keep broadcast engineers in business.
> 
> Yes, the FCC could get involved, but in my experience, they want less work 
> rather than more, and won't.
> 
> Mario
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >are
> >What difference does it make if states choose to "license" broadcast
> >engineers? The FCC has ruled the licensee is solely responsible for
> >determining the technical qualifications of those to whom they
> >delegate their responsibility for technical compliance with the
> >rules. Never forget that the licensee is held responsible for all
> >violations.
> >
> >In the old days when the FCC determined who could technically
> >operate a station by granting licenses, they also regulated those
> >who were licensed and could sanction fines against them.
> >
> >The Act of 1934 clearly makes the FCC solely responsible for
> >governance of stations, and the FCC has made their determination
> >of the method of qualification (as above). Unless someone first
> >modifies these rules (over the NAB's dead body) nothing can change
> >regardless of what some state may think it wants to do.
> >
> >The only thing a state might do is collect a "license" fee from
> >each of us and that would open a rather large can of worms.
> >
> >IMHO the most valuable thing the SBE can do that it is not yet
> >doing is missionary work with station management at state
> >broadcaster's conventions, presenting the value of SBE
> >certification and specialties to those who make selections so
> >they understand the value of qualified people doing their
> >technical work.
> >
> >There is no question that competent technical work and sound
> >equipment decisions are less expensive in the long run. If properly
> >presented and SOLD to management, a significant number would see
> >the value. No, all would not, but enough would get it to begin
> >to change the trend, and that would be more valuable to the
> >industry than any sort of state licensing IMHO.
> >
> >Phil Alexander, CSRE, AMD
> >Broadcast Engineering Services and Technology
> >(a Div. of Advanced Parts Corporation)
> >Ph. (317) 335-2065   FAX (317) 335-9037
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------------------------------- Mario Hieb, P.E. Consulting Engineer
> 
> 36 H St. #2
> Salt Lake City, UT 84103
> 
> e-mail: mario at xmission.com
> text: 8015546069 at mmode.com
> cell: 801-554-6069
> 
> NSPE ~ AFCCE ~ SBE
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> This is the BROADCAST mailing list
> To send to the list, email: broadcast at radiolists.net
> For sub changes, archives and info on this other lists: http://www.radiolists.net/