pointless to do an engineering master's after a physics bachelors?

[Protodome]

Seeing as one cannot become a PE with a master's degree, only bachelors degree in engineering qualifies. So, what is the point of doing an engineering masters if you'll have a very difficult time finding a job? And even if you get really luck and do find a job, you'll have a real PE sign off on all your projects.

So, isn't it generally pointless to do an engineering masters after a physics bachelors? Why do they even allow non-engineering students into these programs, knowing full well they will be allowed to practice as PE's?

[AlephZero]

It depends what country you want to work iin. Don't assume the rest of the world has such a narrow box-ticking approach to accreditation as the USA.

In any case, not every Engineering Masters graduate wants to practice as a PE.

[Protodome]

In Canada, it is the same thing, and I believe in most of Europe as well. Only in Asia would it be possible to practice as a PE, and I am not interested in going to Asia.

Sure, if those engineering master's graduates are not ambitious and would never want to move up on the corporate ladder.

[AlephZero]

The UK professional engineering institutes have a broader based qualification structure. You can get full accreditation with pretty much any science based degree plus appropriate industrial experience - though it may take say 10 years of employment to achieve that.

"Moving up the corporate ladder" seems a fairly narrow view of what every engineering graduate might want to do with the rest of their life.

[Choppy]

Why so black and white? Just because something doesn't work out perfectly doesn't make it pointless. Of course, that would be a nice advantage if you could do a master's degree in engineering and obtain the professional qualification, but it doesn't make the degree useless. Even if you are confining discussion to only engineering companies, a lot more work goes into a project than just the final sign off.

[Protodome]

The UK professional engineering institutes have a broader based qualification structure. You can get full accreditation with pretty much any science based degree plus appropriate industrial experience - though it may take say 10 years of employment to achieve that.

"Moving up the corporate ladder" seems a fairly narrow view of what every engineering graduate might want to do with the rest of their life.

That's not the point. Why should one have to emigrate to an entire different continent just so they can practice as a PE? Europe it self is not too fond of immigrants these days and xenophobia is steadily growing, I wouldn't want to deal with that.

The problem is with institutions, since I believe the government will never change the PE requirements. Why do they accept non-engineering majors, essentially just wasting their time? An engineering masters graduate without a bachelors in engineering has as much chance of finding an engineering job as a physics masters graduates.

Are you really sure that many engineering masters graduates would be fine for doing the work a fresh engineering grad will do for their rest of their careers, with no hope of ever managing projects or becoming senior engineers?

[elkement]

The UK professional engineering institutes have a broader based qualification structure. You can get full accreditation with pretty much any science based degree plus appropriate industrial experience - though it may take say 10 years of employment to achieve that..

I can confirm that this is also true for Austria, so I guess it might be true for more European countries?
In AT you need some science / tech based degree, some years of employment as a technical specialist plus some track record as a manager / entrepreneur or you need to take exams in accounting and business management. Your license is restricted to the fields covered by the technical degree - which means that you have a lot of options with e.g. a physics degree.

[TMFKAN64]

The PE is more important in some fields than others. I've worked in the computer industry for many years, and I'm not sure I've *ever* worked with a PE. Tons of people with EE and CompE degrees though.

[Protodome]

The PE is more important in some fields than others. I've worked in the computer industry for many years, and I'm not sure I've *ever* worked with a PE. Tons of people with EE and CompE degrees though.

True for ChemE and compE, but for mechE, EE, and CivE the PE is really necessary in order to not have such a hard time finding a job and moving up the corporate ladder. Sure, for some really specialized EE's in the defense industry, but for the general industry a PE is usually required once you have a few years of experience under your belt.

[fss]

True for ChemE and compE, but for mechE, EE, and CivE the PE is really necessary in order to not have such a hard time finding a job and moving up the corporate ladder. Sure, for some really specialized EE's in the defense industry, but for the general industry a PE is usually required once you have a few years of experience under your belt.

Sorry, but that has not been my experience in the government/IT/defense sector at all; at least for mechanical and electrical engineers. I don't work with civil engineers much.

[dawin]

True for ChemE and compE, but for mechE, EE, and CivE the PE is really necessary in order to not have such a hard time finding a job and moving up the corporate ladder. Sure, for some really specialized EE's in the defense industry, but for the general industry a PE is usually required once you have a few years of experience under your belt.

Based off your question and follow-up comments, I'm questioning your experience with this situation. Some fields of engineering will require a PE if you seek to grow more professionally, but this is not true for all disciplines, particularly if they're not in a regulated industry (e.g. civil, HVAC, plumbing).

To be frank, if you don't know what you're talking about, which you obviously don't, listen to other before coming to a conclusion on the matter.