Ethics Section Chapter 8 Ethical

Problems of Engineers in Management

Engineers in managerial positions encounter some or all of the ethical situations
discussed in Chapter 7
Managers control the resources of the corporation to a much greater degree than
others
Conflicts of interest may occur as well
The manager must be alert to the potential for conflict of interest and must avoid
becoming involved, or even appearing to be involved in unethical practices

Adherence to the Provincial Act:

One of the most obvious responsibilities of the professional engineer in a

management position is to ensure the professional engineering act is carried out
within the managers responsibility
Two most common infringements of the Act in most provinces concern using
unlicensed personnel to carry out work that P.Engs do, and misuse of engineering
titles
This is highly illegal, as well as unethical and unprofessional

Unlicensed Personnel:
Using unlicensed personnel is a serious infringement
This can harm the client, the employer, or the general public
Engineering work must be done by, or supervised by, a professional engineer
Manager must risk offending the employee who is unlicensed in order to obey the
act
When acquiring a license isnt possible, they must be put under supervision of a
P.Eng. in order for them to continue with their useful and properly regulated work

Misuse of Engineering Titles:

If the tasks performed by an employee do not require a license, and they have
assumed a title with the word engineer in it, the title of the employee must be
changed to eliminate ambiguity

Reviewing Work and Evaluating Competence:

Engineers are required by law to practice only within their limits of competence
Engineers shouldnt undertake any work that isnt within their competence

Work Review for Accuracy:

Most engineers have their work routinely reviewed by a second engineer for
accuracy
An important decision should never be made on the basis of a single engineers
unchecked calculations
 These reviews are always carried out with the knowledge of the person who did
the original work
The purpose of this is to ensure safety, improve quality, and reduce liability

Work Review to Assess Competence:

Its common practice to evaluate the performance of all employees on a regular
basis
The engineering manager is usually responsible for this action
May also be necessary to review an engineers work to evaluate competence at
other times as well
A manager should never ask an engineer to review the work of another
engineering without the knowledge of the engineer who prepped the work
By not doing this is contrary to the code of ethics, and is also a matter of simple
courtesy

Discrimination in the Engineering Environment:

Engineering manager plays a key role in hiring, firing, and evaluating the
performance of engineers
Because of this, engineers are always in a line of battle in terms of discrimination
There shouldnt be any problems of this due to the Charter of Rights and
Freedoms

Special Problems Related to Computers:

Computers have incredible speed in analysis, and removed barriers in order to
perform routine calculations and repetitive drawing
Computers, however, create new responsibilities, like security, backup of data,
infringement, and bugs in programs

Liability for Errors in Computer Programs:

Computer programs are susceptible to bugs that cause incorrect calculations
A question of liability arises if the errors should result in an incorrect engineering
decision
Disclaimers in the documentation state that the liability of the seller of the
computer program is limited to the cost of the program
The engineer must be alert to the possibility that errors may exist in design
software
They must perform independent checks to ensure the validity of such design
assistance
These checks must be done before using them as a basis for key design decisions

Hiring and Dismissal:

Engineering manager hires and fires staff when required
Engineering manager should be aware of some aspects for hiring and dismissal
Employment Contracts and Policies:
Best method for employing professional engineers is through employment
contracts
These contracts clearly outline how long theyre employed, salary rates, vacation
time, etc.

Terminating Employment for Just Cause:

Manager must take responsibility for terminating or discharging employees when
their services are no longer required
These terminations must be subject to the employment contract
Also, employees may be discharged for just causes, like performing criminal acts,
or inadequate job performance
Also, things like serious disobedience, serious incompetence, serious misconduct,
and excessive absenteeism are also things as well

Wrong Dismissal:
If an employee without an employment contract is dismissed and the reason isnt
a just cause, then there is a risk of a wrongful dismissal
There are six situations that could be considered wrongful dismissal, even though
the employee isnt technically dismissed
o Forced resignation, demotion, downward change in reporting function, a
unilateral change of responsibilities, a forced transfer, and serious
misconduct of the employer toward the employee

Case Study 8.1 The Unlicensed Engineer

Lets say youre a manager of the engineering design department of an consulting
engineering firm
You hire and fire employees
6 months ago, you hired Jorges Xavier, who recently moved to the area from
another province
During the job interview, you emphasized that he must be licensed, and the job
offer letter said that he was being hired as a P.Eng.
After Xavier started work, you had a sign placed on his door and had business
cards printed, both having the P.Eng. designation beside his name
Later, you receive a complaint from a client who claims that Xavier isnt a
professional engineer
Client is furious that youd send unqualified people to work on their project
You contact the provincial association of P.Engs. and they confirm that Xaver
doesnt have his P.Eng.

Question:
Who is responsible for this problem? Can you fire Xavier for just cause?
Does it make a difference if Xavier is licensed from another province, but forgot to
apply for a transfer of license? Does it make a difference if Xavier has applied to
transfer his license, but is still being processed by the provincial association? Does it
make a difference if Xavier has never been licensed by any province?

Authors Recommended Solution:

A person who has been licensed in one province will generally qualify to be
licensed in another province
In some cases, they may have to write some additional exams to prove that they
are qualified, but this will take only a matter of months
This case involves a breach of the Professional Engineering act
Xavier is guilty of practising professional engineering without a license
His business cards say P.Eng., and he has used them without protest or correction
He is also not licensed in the province of where hes working
The employer (you) are also guilty of breach of the code of ethics if you permit
Xavier to continue practising engineering
We must determine what kind of work Xavier did for the client
If he was in a junior, or training position, his work would have been supervised by
another engineer, and there wouldnt be any problems, and no damage would have
occurred
However, you are ultimately responsible for verifying the qualifications of your
workers
If Xavier failed to apply for a license in 6 months of employment, but has a valid
license in another province, then this could be interpreted as serious misconduct
and a breach of the code of ethics, and is just cause for dismissal
If Xavier applied for a license, but this application was delayed by the provincial
association, Xavier probably complied with your requirements, and dismissal
would be unjust
If Xavier has never been licensed in another province, then he has been dishonest,
and such fundamental dishonesty would be just cause for his dismissal
You, as a manager, also bear much of the responsibility for any embarrassment or
liability that the firm suffers, even though you stated that the requirement of a
license is needed
You didnt check to see if he had his license
Xavier is at fault for using the P.Eng. title, and may be subject to a charge under
the act

Case Study 8.2 Dismissal of Offensive Engineer

Summary:
Lets say youre a licensed engineer working with 10 other engineers, and 18
designers and CAD operators
You are called to the VPs office, who is your direct superior
He is asking you to fire one of your engineers who has disgraced himself by
talking in a loud and offensive way to the VP at a company picnic held the
previous week
 You also attended that picnic and recall that the talk began about sports, and was
unrelated to company business
After some drinks, the VP and the engineer started insulting each other
You tell the VP that the engineers work has been satisfactory, but the VP says the
engineers behaviour was offensive and insubordinate
He says that insubordination is grounds for dismissal
He also states that failure to co-operate with his request is also insubordination

Question:
What do you do here? How would you do it?

Authors Recommended Solution:

First step is to get all the facts and define the problem
Was the behaviour of the engineer a just cause for dismissal?
Since you witnessed the incident, and didnt initiate the dismissal action, you
didnt really consider it a serious case of insubordination
Also, for the engineers behaviour to be considered sufficiently scandalous to
justify dismissal, there has to be a record of continuous insubordination and wilful
disobedience
This shouldnt just be an argument that happened at a social event
There doesnt seem to be a basis to justify dismissal in this case
Under the code of ethics, you have a duty to the employer, as well as the
employee
As such, the engineers behaviour doesnt constitute a just cause for dismissal
A reprimand of the engineer might be more appropriate, and nothing more on top
of this is the best action

Case Study 8.3 Conflict of Interest

Summary:
Youre an engineering manager at a company, and you have been asked to sit on a
10 member standards committee
Committee consists of you, three government representatives, and three
engineering profs, and its charged by a rep from an engineering society
associated with the companys field
One of the other industry reps has proposed a revision to a spec for a component
that you manufacture
The change will make a fairly modest improvement in quality, but will require
specialized manufacturing expertise and equipment
During this meeting, you see that this will improve the quality of your product by
a fair amount, but it will create some hardships for your competitors
You also believe that the person making this proposal will also benefit in a similar
way
Youre not sure whether you should bring these points in front of the committee
 You didnt propose this modification, but it does improve the quality of the
product, but any benefits that the company will receive is purely by chance

Question:
Do you have an ethical obligation to inform the committee that your company may
benefit from this revision? Do you have an obligation to point out that the person
proposing the revision may also stand to benefit?

Authors Recommended Solution:

This is a clear conflict of interest, and you must disclose it to the committee
Code of ethics states that the engineer must put the welfare of society above
personal interest
The main function of a standards committee is to serve the public welfare
The committee may decide, after discussion, in favour of the revision
However, it would probably be acceptable for you to express an opinion on the
revision once the conflict of interest has resolved
Also, you cant provide a formal vote
You dont have an obligation to speak about the member who is proposing the
revision unless you believe that there is a deliberate fraud, which doesnt appear
to be the case

Case Study 8.4 Errors in Plans and Specifications

Summary:
You are the engineering manager for the Acme Assembly company, where they
design, manufacture, and assembly machinery
You have received a contract to construct 20 gearboxes that have been designed
by Delta Designs
This company is occasionally a competitor
However, Delta is extremely busy, and they dont have the capacity for this work
right now
One of your engineers notices that the size of shafts and gears on the drawings
appear to be rather small for the torque and power ratings of the gearboxes
Rough calculations seems to confirm that assessment
You call the chief engineer at Delta Designs, and he states that he is too busy to
double-check the drawings
He has full confidence of his engineers and said that you should get on with the
job
He also points out that youre in the contract as a fabricator, and not a designer
He also says you shouldnt be reviewing his work

Question:
Do you have an ethical obligation to pursue this discrepancy? Would it make any
difference if failure of the gearboxes could result in injury or death, rather than
financial loss?
Authors Recommended Solution:
Under the code of ethics, an engineer is obligated to a client to ensure that the
client is fully aware of the consequences of failing to follow the engineers advice
In this case, a telephone call wouldnt have sufficed, either ethically or legally
You should follow up with a letter after the telephone call, which describes your
concerns and request written instructions to proceed
If the chief engineer at Delta Designs should instruct you, in writing, to proceed
with the making of these gearboxes, you would do so, unless you consider the
flaws in the design to be very serious
This might indicate a problem of negligence on Delta Designs Part
The potential for injury or death in the case of failure is important
Failure to safeguard the safety of the public could be considered professional
misconduct on your part
If serious injury or death is possible, the chief engineers complaint about you
reviewing his work is irrelevant
A review of the design is appropriate in these circumstances, and through your
diligence, you have sought to protect the public, and safeguard the chief
engineers reputation as well

Case Study 8.5 Manipulation of Data

Summary:
You are a professional geologist responsible for all exploration in a mine
You report directly to the CEO of the mine, who is an accountant
You finished evaluating initial ore assays for a newly opened part of the mine, and
they show much lower ore content than hoped or expected
The COE is very disappointed, even though you assure him that the results are
preliminary and that more thorough results will be available soon
The CEO had hoped to present good news about the exploration to shareholders
CEO asks you to keep the poor results confidential, and not to report or discuss
them until after the shareholders meeting, and not even with the people in the
company as well

Question:
Is it ethical to keep this information confidential from the shareholders, who are
the owners of the company?

Authors Recommended Solution:

Geological data are extremely sensitive information, and can be the sole basis for
major decisions in the mining, oil and gas industries
The financial welfare of the company may depend on keeping this poor data
confidential
Here, you have initial results and they have been deemed as preliminary
Releasing preliminary data showing low ore content could introduce a loss of
confidence in the company
 As such, if there is no concern about fraudulent intent, it would be ethical to keep
these reports confidential until the results are known with certainty

Case Study 8.6 Professional Accountability

Summary:
Ethel Eager, P.Eng., is a mech. Eng. Working in the production department of a
well-known specialty chemicals company
The company makes consumer products in Canada for the North American
market
Eager started out 5 years ago in a junior production position, reporting to Cam
Complacent, P.Eng., the production supervisor
When Eager started at this Canadian plant, it was highly successful
However, over 5 years of Eagers employment, the plant became steadily less
competitive compared to other firms
When Complacent retired recently, Eager was promoted to fill in for Complacent
Having passed her PPE during this time, Eager was aware of the importance of
ethics in engineering
Over the past 5 years, Eager noticed several unusual practices in the plant and in
the office
Eager then approached Complacent about her concerns, but Complacent shut
down her concerns, and said being easy on these subjects helped to keep morale
and productively up
Eager was personally convinced that some employees were cheating their
employer by taking products home, and misrepresenting their hours of work
However, Eager kept quiet, since there didnt appear to be a significant problem
However, shortly after filling in for Complacent, early one Monday morning,
there had been a major theft at the plant on the weekend
The police caught two thieves, who turned out to be employees at this company
The police later found out that a network of employees were involved, and wanted
to interview Eager about further investigations
Later, Eager received a fax from the companys VP wanting to review why the TO
plants costs were high, and productivity was low
Eager received a fax saying that the theft is known, and will be at the plant
tomorrow to investigate

Question:
Should Eager be held accountable for the employees actions?
Authors Recommended Solution:
Eager is accountable to her management, and possible to the police and to her
profession
This is because she knew about the dishonest environment, and let it flourish
Because Eager is a P.Eng., she has a duty under the code of ethics to all
stakeholders to act with high ideals of personal honour and integrity
 She also has a duty to expose, before the proper tribunals, unprofessional and
unethical conduct of another engineer
Eager should have explained to Complacent that her professional duty included
dealing with her concerns, the benefits of dealing with them, and the
consequences of ignoring them
If this didnt work, they she could have suggested to Complacent that they could
work together to talk this over with senior management
If Complacent was unwilling here, her last resort would probably be going alone
to senior management, or obtaining advice from the provincial association