Sounds like a group that captures credentialing in the industry and then winds up using it to push their own flawed ideology on the entire industry. Because who else would actually be interested in being part of such a board.
No thank you.
No thank you.
I know for a fact that aerospace, electrical, and mechanical engineers working on designing rockets, nuclear reactors, space capsules, and electric charging infrastructure do not need this credential. And so most of them do not have it.
I'm not sure ABET is the most relevant here? What would making CS programs accredited change?
And you didn't quite mix it up, a degree from an ABET accredited school is required to get your professional engineering certification, which is often required in cases where engineering designs carry legal liability.
I am unable to find concrete numbers on this, but I would bet that the majority of employed engineers in the US do not carry a professional engineering certification.
My point is that accreditation boards and trade unions can help set standard minimums of what an engineer (or trades person) will know going into a job. Of course employers can ignore them, but in general those standards help bring consistent expectations to a given trade.
EDIT: i.e. I'm still going to want to interview them and have them prove to me that they can write code.
Yes, of course you should still interview them afterwards, I'm sure that's what credentialed professions do as well. My point is just to have the Leetcode portion be done once rather than for every company's interview.
I don't trust someone else, especially some credentialing body to administer leetcode style questions. I'm still going to want to have a candidate prove they can actually write code.
Anyway, many companies are outsourcing phone screens now to services such as Karat, where Kiwi contractor engineers provide 24/7 interview availability. Yet those interviews cannot be transferred from company to prospective Karat-using company. So you get the worst of all worlds.
I don't think memorizing trivia is a useful signal for a job, which is what a lot of "domain expertise" looks like in interviews. If you're going to write software and solve problems for a job then you should be able to sit down and solve some medium difficulty coding problems. It's not that hard. Personally I'd much rather do that than a take-home coding assignment.
The number of people out there working as engineers who can't write basic code is too high to not check.
To go back full circle, if you get a decent credentialing system then people who can code can simply pass a test once (let’s say every 5-10 years) and be done with it instead of every single time they interview. DRY!
The phrase "get a second opinion" is so intrinsically tied to medicine that it's a little weird that you'd imply that any doctor will do.
I ask a ton of questions and I've found that good doctors a) welcome the questions and b) do a good job of explaining. If q doctor doesn't really give me good answers then I'll go elsewhere. A lot of doctors appointments are ahead of some bigger procedure or an ongoing relationship, so the first meeting definitely is evaluative for me.