undefined I am saddened, today.

In 30 years, little has changed for women in non-traditional careers like engineering. Micro-aggressions, unintended biases and isolating actions continue in the workplace, even mine. These behaviours foster persisting cultures of intolerance, resisting change.

True, many women work with amazing colleagues in their departments or elsewhere in their organizations, colleagues who provide support, solace and safe havens in times of stress. That wasn’t enough 30 years ago when those 14 women were killed.

We must foster a culture of heart, where we promote inclusivity, tolerance and the willingness to step up and speak up when we witness inappropriate actions, language and behaviour.

Let’s make a difference today for tomorrow.

Presidential updates for 2019

To all of you to whom I said that being President would be just as much work as being Vice President: I was wrong.

The last half of 2018 was one of the busiest seasons I have experienced, about on par with writing my dissertation, which I am very grateful to have at last fully completed (convocation was last November). Coupled with my paying commitments teaching Mech410T at UBC during the summer and teaching a full-time load at Camosun College in the fall, Engineers and Geoscientists BC activities completely filled up my time: Professional Reliance Review meetings, Branch meetings, elections, the Annual General Meeting and conference, and then follow up meetings, presentations and promotional activities like photos and writing for the Nov/Dec edition of Innovation Magazine.

Everyone I am working with has been amazing: I am so very grateful that this President role brings me into contact with brilliant, courageous and forward-thinking professionals. I look forward to meeting our two new government appointed Councillors later this month and working with this new team to ensure the new Professional Governance Act provides regulators with the tools we need to best protect the public interest. Keep checking the website for Council updates.

I am also looking forward to connecting with our national colleagues in engineering and geoscience regulation. Already, I have trips booked through winter and spring to attend several of the provincial regulator AGMs and meetings of Engineers Canada and Geoscience Canada.

Should be a lot of fun!

Professional Reliance updates

From Engineers and Geoscientists BC, July 30, 2018 (view this online):

As many of you know, the BC Government has been engaged in a review of the professional reliance model in the natural resource sector. This process, and the reforms that are being recommended in government’s , could fundamentally reshape our professions and how they are governed.

These changes would impact all members, not just those who work in the natural resource sector. Continue reading


Wow! I just noticed that I have not posted here since before the elections! Tells me how busy I have been with Engineers & Geoscientists BC Council, work and my dissertation.

With the new year as Vice President, I begin my Branch visits across the province, starting in two weeks. If you are a member of Engineers & Geoscientists BC and have a question about regulation or what Council is up to, come on out to one of the Branch meetings when I am there. I look forward to meeting as many members as possible over the next few months.

With the new term upon us at Camosun College, I look forward to setting up class tours in industry to consolidate our in-class learning. If you are an industry member working in the engineering community, let me know what strengths our grads currently have…and where we can help develop needed skills and knowledge. This week will be our team development sessions and review, so a great time to look forward.

I am developing a new course for UBC Mechanical Engineering this term, as well, and look forward to working with the academic team on this new online opportunity. All very secret, for now, but should be running this summer, if all goes as planned…

As to my dissertation, it is in progress and very close to completion (defence). I have a paper related to this work in progress for delivery in Utah later this year. I will add it to the list of publications when it is done.

Happy New Year!

APEGBC 2017 VP Nominee

Honoured by the confidence of the APEGBC Nominating Committee to include my name on their list of candidates, I look forward to running again.

I will post my Candidate Statement on this blog once I have written it.

Hmm…the challenge of posting them each time is that I cannot simply reissue the same one…  🙂

Councillor (not VP…yet…)

Just a quick shout out to all my supporters!

Thank you for your votes during the latest APEGBC election. While somewhat disappointed that I was not elected Vice President this term, I am very happy to continue to serve as Councillor. And I am honoured that so many of you voted for me!

I look forward to another fine year on Council, working to ensure our professional association is the best it can be as both regulator and advocate: two interwoven roles that make engineering and geoscience powerful in British Columbia.

See you at the annual conference and AGM!

APEGBC Q&A – Full Responses

As a component of the 2016 election process for APEGBC Council, a question and answer page was adopted at the request of members so that voters could learn more about the candidates.

I found the 1500 character maximum too limiting, so have reprinted my responses in full for your reading pleasure…

APEGBC is the regulatory authority charged with protecting the public interest with respect to the practice of engineering and geoscience in the province of BC. What is the key challenge facing APEGBC?

As a regulatory authority, the key challenge APEGBC faces right now is the risk of losing the privilege of self-regulation. Many British Columbians, members and non-members, do not have a clear understanding of what self-regulation means. We must educate our members and the general public about the benefits and requirements of a self-regulated profession. It is only by supporting self-regulation that we will have the privilege of keeping it.

Self-regulation is not only the handing out of licenses to qualified applicants. Self-regulation engages professionals in regulatory processes, such as defining the roles and responsibilities of registered members, imperative for us in APEGBC where we have great diversity in our disciplinary knowledge and expertise. Self-regulation allows professionals to effectively respond to our changing world and to ensure the safety of the increasing expanse of technology that we develop. Self-regulation enables members to guide the public in determining when a professional member should be consulted and to ensure that he or she is a member in good standing, legally permitted to fulfill these duties.

I want to take a moment here to acknowledge and commend the vast majority of our members who are clearly ethical, keeping their knowledge current and delivering high quality projects. I also want to acknowledge the work being done by my colleagues on the various committees necessary for regulation. Overall, we’re doing a great job! Let’s be proactive about self-regulation so that we remain in control of our professions.

What are the key issues facing the engineering and/ or geoscience professions?

I believe the three key issues facing our professions concern education about self-regulation, the enhancement of fairness, equity, diversity and inclusion in our professions, and the expansion of our practice guideline library.

Education About Self-Regulation

We need to provide education and promotional materials about our regulatory responsibilities, legislated for the public’s benefit, and showcase the range of activities for which it is necessary to consult with qualified professionals from APEGBC and other regulatory bodies. We need to make this information more transparent and readily available.

Education will have multiple incidental benefits, depending on how we decide to carry it out, more so if we establish this effort as founded among us as members, branches and divisions. It will serve to remind us about self-regulation’s benefits and requirements. It will mitigate some of the challenges we experience in terms of fairness, equity, diversity and inclusion. In addition, it will inform BC children and youth about career opportunities available in engineering and geoscience, thereby helping to stave off impending shortages due to retirements and growth. 

Fairness, Equity, Diversity and Inclusion

Recent surveys continue to highlight the disparity between the salaries of men and women in our professions. This is only one of the areas that persist in inequity, in spite of our members efforts to rectify it.

British Columbia contains one of the most inclusive societies in the world, yet we continue to exhibit the unintended consequences of implicit bias (check out Harvard University’s implicit bias project at or test yourself using one of their online Implicit Association Tests targeting gender or other biases, at

Other ‘isms’ that we unconsciously exhibit include decisions based on age, body shape and race. We might be able to assess our members’ salary and compensation data (anonymized, of course!) to determine in which areas we require additional practice guidelines to help us become more inclusive.

Practice Guidelines

We need to expand our library of practice guidelines to ensure the broadest adoption of best practices across the province on both technical and non-technical topics.

APEGBC’s Practice Guidelines are very effective in clearing up unfortunate areas of concern by presenting best practice methods and procedures, such as those developed in swift response to major issues, like in the Forestry Sector, relating to the Mount Polley dam breach or even our current understandings about climate change. New practice guidelines for human rights and diversity are in work and additional topics can be explored as we identify areas of concern.

Interestingly, our practice guidelines have been quoted as best practice examples in the new WorkSafe BC guideline for developing written safe-work procedures (

Looking five years ahead, what is your vision for APEGBC as a professional regulatory body in BC?

I see APEGBC as the preeminent professional regulatory body in British Columbia, recognized across Canada and around the world as the leader in maintaining professional practice and enhancing our reputation. It will be British Columbian engineers and geoscientists who will be instrumental in elevating our technological reach and societal influence to make the world a better place.

Okay, we might not get there in five years, but at least we will be on our way!

Please remember to vote!


New Members, Life Members


New Members, Life Members

It was fascinating this week to spend some time in Vancouver meeting with some of APEGBC’s Past Presidents and attending the new registrants’ Induction Ceremony. I enjoy meeting and chatting with members about their interests and opinions, and finding out how I might be able to help them get the most out of the association.

Past Presidents’ Forum:

Some presidents from past councils have an ongoing interest in the success of the association. These individuals meet twice a year for a number of reasons: to keep themselves informed about what the current APEGBC Council is working on; to discuss what is happening, what has changed and what has not; and to meet with each other and catch up. Most important to me, however, is that they freely offer advice and guidance to any current council members who are able to attend.

I attend these events as often as I can.

Our Past Presidents tend to keep themselves informed about current events that impact the engineering and geoscience professions. They are thoughtful and considerate in their advice. I value their comments and questions quite highly.


Russ Kinghorn giving an update on the activities of Engineers Canada

The meeting this week was especially informative because the Past Presidents had included in the agenda an opportunity to delve into a number of interesting topics in small groups. Key discussion points were shared with the larger group at the end.

One of the topics the people at my table talked about was how new members are obtaining their technical education from diverse institutions. They expressed their concern that so few were coming from UBC, the sole provider of engineering and geoscience education back in the day. Through the conversation that ensued, we noted that the institutions across the province today are nationally accredited to the same standards as UBC and that international degrees become approved through the rigorous application process that we have at APEGBC. Apparently, we are national leaders in this area, as well, with our competency-based application process and our registry of approved degree-granting institutions. We discussed at length how the registration process has changed over the years to ensure that all members are appropriately qualified through both education and experience.

Other topics we discussed included:

  • how best to support BC engineers and geoscientists who approve the engineering work that is produced overseas by non-BC companies;
  • how best to best articulate the benefits of maintaining our dual purpose (unlike the Ontario model in place now, which separates PEO regulation from OSPE member advocacy, APEGBC is both Regulator of and Advocate for the professions) by being clear that our primary purpose is public safety; and
  • how best to promote the regulation of technologists as Engineering and Geoscience Licensees, in order to enhance public safety and public knowledge, and elevate the clear value of technology practice for the benefit of individual technologists and of the companies for which they work.

Induction Ceremony


In the Fairmont Vancouver Hotel

After a brief socializing break, we all moved over to the Fairmont Vancouver Hotel’s gorgeous ballroom in which the Induction Ceremony was held. What a beautiful room…

Ann English, P.Eng., CEO and Registrar of APEGBC, was an excellent master of the ceremony, keeping the awards moving, giving a stirring talk about the obligations of engineers and geoscientists to uphold public safety and pronouncing all those names very well, indeed!


Ann English introducing Life Members; President Michael Wrinch, P.Eng, FEC, and Vice President Bob Stewart, P.Eng. handing out Gold Foils

Life Members were recognized first. Their lists of accomplishments through their long careers were inspiring.

After the presentations of their gold foils, the 129 newly registered professional members walked across the stage. The inductees received their licenses to the sometimes raucous applause of friends and families. I met some new inductees at my table who have already begun interesting careers. Their supporters were clearly very proud.


Life members in the brochure

Congratulations to all!

About CPD


, , , ,

I recently received an anonymous comment to my July Candidate Statement post in which interesting points were made around continuous professional development, CPD. I think it is likely that others may have the same viewpoints, so I am addressing them here. The three points were:

  1. The Engineers and Geoscientists Act (which requires adherence to a Code of Ethics), in conjunction with the Code of Ethics, already creates a legal requirement to maintain competence, making the CPD bylaw redundant.
  2. Suggesting that there may be engineers or geoscientists who are not conducting sufficient professional development could be construed as violating the Code of Ethics.
  3. Very few, if any, engineers or geoscientists are completing insufficient CPD.

First, to clarify, in addition to requiring the development of and adherence to a Code of Ethics, the Act mentions professional development once, in reference to possible bylaws council can create “to assist in promoting and maintaining the competency and proficiency of members and licensees” (10.1.m.1). Previous members of the association created and updated the first Code of Ethics, which refers to CPD twice, in Principles Six and Ten. Principle Six states that engineers and geoscientists must:

Keep themselves informed in order to maintain their competence, strive to advance the body of knowledge within which they practice and provide opportunities for the professional development of their associates.

This principle is clearly about the requirement for professional development. Therefore, my anonymous commenter is correct: together, the Act and the Code of Ethics define the legal requirement for CPD. This, however, does not make the proposed bylaw redundant. Rather, we need the bylaw to operationalize the Act and regulate the activities of our members – this is the duty of APEGBC as a self-regulating body.

One simple way to officially uphold the Act has already been piloted for the past few years as a voluntary trial: a check-box on our membership renewal webpage. Unfortunately, I am aware that a number of our members do not click the check-box specifically because it is voluntary to do so, despite completing more than the annual development requirement. As a professional association, we need to demonstrate 100% member compliance so that legislators and public alike can be fully confident that all engineers and geoscientists are conducting sufficient professional development.

The second principle relating to professional development is Principle Ten, which states that engineers and geoscientists must:

Extend public knowledge and appreciation of engineering and geoscience and protect the profession from misrepresentation and misunderstanding.

This is the second aspect of CPD: outreach to and education of the public. CPD protects the profession from misrepresentation and misunderstanding by requiring not only that each professional member is, in fact, increasing their own knowledge but that they are also helping to extend the public’s knowledge about engineering and geoscience. Many members are participating in school outreach programs, giving presentations and judging science fairs. Other members are participating in public presentations or mentoring junior engineers. These activities qualify for CPD hours, too.

Principle Ten is the principle that my anonymous commenter suggests is violated if someone suggests another member may not be CPD compliant, as if such an assertion casts aspersion on APEGBC. Yet this is nonsense: identifying members at fault is good for APEGBC because it means that we are paying attention to what each other is doing so that only qualified engineers, geoscientists and licensees are permitted to practice.  There are members who have been negligent — just take a look at the disciplinary page on the website.

On a technical level, Principle Ten refers only to educating the public about our professions so that neither members nor the public misrepresent APEGBC. It does not refer to member actions, unlike Principles Seven and Nine. These two principles directly relate to members misrepresenting other professional members, highlighting our obligations to support other professionals yet report them if they do something “hazardous, illegal or unethical”. Interestingly, these two principles actually support my view that we must have the freedom to challenge the few professional members who are completing insufficient CPD as determined by their peers: those members are misrepresenting their knowledge and expertise.

For reference, Principle Seven states that engineers and geoscientists must:

Conduct themselves with fairness, courtesy and good faith towards clients, colleagues and others, give credit where it is due and accept, as well as give, honest and fair professional comment.

Principle Nine states that engineers and geoscientists must:

Report to their association or other appropriate agencies any hazardous, illegal or unethical professional decisions or practices by members, licensees or others.

It is worth noting that the majority of engineers and geoscientists have been maintaining their responsibilities by taking classes, attending workshops, reading relevant trade journals and sharing knowledge with other professionals. It is, however, somewhat naïve to believe this applies to us all. I have worked with hundreds of amazing professionals who more than uphold the APEGBC Code of Ethics. Yet, I regret to say that I know of a couple who just don’t make as much time for CPD as they should. These two individuals, less than 0.5% of my professional acquaintances, have the potential to destroy the incredible reputation we share as professionals by shirking their responsibilities in some way. When we call them to task about this lack, we strengthen our profession and we show others we believe this principle to be vital. This is how we further protect the public.

I am not sure if my anonymous commenter had an actual objection to mandatory CPD, or only wished to assert that he or she thinks it is redundant. Perhaps the real objection may be similar to one of those I have heard personally or read on the CPD microsite, such as: a concern that reporting CPD will take too much time (It won’t: it only takes a couple minutes), a concern that verifiable CPD activities are too expensive (Some are, but many of the activities conscientious engineers and geoscientists undergo are verifiable and free), a concern that non-professionals are dictating to members what qualifies for CPD (Not happening: we have around a thousand member volunteers, some of whom have informed the guidelines for development requirements within their own disciplines, member to member — as for the specific activities, we each have the responsibility to decide for ourselves), a concern that non-practicing members cannot meet the practice requirement (Irrelevant: non-practicing members do not have to complete CPD because they are not practicing as engineers or geoscientists), or a concern that the requirements are too high (Through consultation with over 4000 members, the number of hours has been lowered).

What is the downside of mandatory CPD? I cannot see one. Even if having a bylaw for mandatory CPD was redundant, which it is not, the worst outcome would be wasting a minute or two in checking the box on the renewal form.

What are the benefits? Self-regulation, increased public trust, increased education, increased relevance, increased participation and engagement of members, and enhanced engineering and geoscience practice.

There is nothing to lose and much to gain with mandatory CPD.

I urge all APEGBC members to review the CPD microsite and read the considered answers to member questions. Read the requirements of other professions in BC and other engineering and geoscience regulators across Canada. Consider your own development activities and see how many of them already align with the CPD requirements. Mandatory CPD is an easy way to uphold our Act and, more importantly, public safety.

I hope this helps you make your decision as you vote on the new bylaw.