“If the work was engineering-level and good, the State Engineer should have offered to stamp it and pass it on for consideration. That’s what any reasonable person would have done with a concerned citizen who knew what they were doing. Problem solved.”
I have incorporated numerous suggestions from designers, plant operators, and constructive crafts. Not blindly of course, each is evaluated for merit. There is nothing wrong with that. Yet there are those with professional licenses who look down at anyone working for them, or even clients, with disdain. It’s a really good way to lose clients, and I have seen it happen.
“Yet there are those with professional licenses who look down at anyone working for them, or even clients, with disdain. It’s a really good way to lose clients, and I have seen it happen.”
Oh, I’ve seen it plenty of times myself. However, another aspect of licensing that hasn’t been discussed on this thread is liability. Someone has to be responsible - in fact (as I’m sure you know) the legal concept of “Responsible Charge” goes hand-in-hand with licensing.
If this individual’s suggestions create a traffic hazard, who is responsible?
I still maintain that the right way for this state engineer to handle this situation is to review, make any necessary changes, collaborate with the guy, and stamp the freaking plans. Everyone wins, and the engineer doesn’t look like a douche.