Same with regards to the sciences and math. I agree the engineering discipline may be more rigorous, but what happens is that too many junior colleges offer the same title of degree, and since it might mot be ABET recognized in title, lacks a standard curriculum throughour the community. Worse, even if recognized, enough demand may have existed that many second rate students from les rigorous programs have dfamed the reputation of the degree title.
Many Material Scientists are only associated with metallurgy or testing procedures of materials, even amongst professors in academic environments.
The point I want to communicate, is KISS, Keep It Simple S*****, the Civil, Mech and Elec degrees in Engineering are well recognized over several generations and the business community is able to handle a substitution of those skillsets between one another. Too frequently a fringe degree, although perhaps an order of agnitude more rigorous, is discounted or disregarded entirely 90% of the time as being an insufficient match. This tends to happen because of social educational levels of the layman rather than those who have the skills.
Likewise, the same institutions needing those skills frequently have allowed non-science/engineering background managers to rise within their ranks. They also lack the ability to ask the right questions to discern skillsets between the engineering disciplines to identify the good catches. Frequently they will wordsmith job descriptions to 'better manage' personnel and where previous job descriptions might have preferred say a Materials Sciencce Engr major or a Engineering Physicist or Physical Engineering student, the wordsmithing has reduced the title to General Engineering because that is the title available in their metric of recognized degrees say from a SAT or GRE table of possible degree titles.
Then to make things worse, a lessor capable candidate who had a higher GPA because of less rigorous curriculum, outscores the more rigorously studied graduate, especially between lessor schools and most competitive institutions.
Unless you already are known by your future employer or are the very top of your class, I found the more successful candidates come from state supported schools with good curriculums majoring in the major engineering degree curriculums. Frequently they only master perhaps one of 4 sophmoric disciplines the ABET curriculum has introduced to them, but it's sufficient for them to be marketable. Those who have the more rigorous skills, frequently aren't even made aware of the problems which demand their skills to solve.
This is part of my frustration with the electronics industry which has evolved, unfortunately from more greedy middle managers who have curtailed the enginering professions into a lessor category which they associate with mere 'technical skills'. Most of them are clueless to rigorous professinal engineering standards.