Recent orders

NSPE Code of Ethics Case Study (ENGINEER EMPLOYEE’S REFUSAL TO PROVIDE REPORT)

FACTS:

Engineer A, a structural engineer, is an employee of a federal agency responsible for performing inspections and filing reports on certain rehabilitated structures in an urban area. Engineer A’s Supervisor B, a non-engineer, assigned Engineer A the responsibility to inspect and write a report on a building upon which repairs were allegedly conducted. Among the issues that Supervisor B requests Engineer A to address in his report are whether the building will require additional “major, minor or additional structural work over the life of the building in order to used it in a manner consistent with the public health and safety.” The agency required this information in order to make a determination as to whether to repair or foreclose on the property. Prior to undertaking the work involved, Engineer A, who was not involved in inspecting the building prior to the rehabilitation, requested detailed information from the agency as to the types of structural repairs conducted (e.g., plans, specifications, etc.). The requested information is not available and no funding exists for further investigation. Engineer A tells Supervisor B he would be unable to provide the requested report. Nevertheless, Supervisor B persists in requesting a complete report addressing the issues.

QUESTION:

Was it ethical for Engineer A to refuse to provide the requested report?

NSPE Code of Ethics Case Study (ENGINEERING RESEARCH — CLIENT CHANGES TO REPORT)

FACTS:

Engineer A is a research professor at a major engineering college. He performs important research in connection with certain new technologies in the field of transportation. As part of his work, the university has received a number of grants from major corporations and the federal government. As the principal investigator, Engineer A collaborates with several other research professors at the university as well as graduate students. In addition, he routinely meets with representatives of government agencies and private funding groups and reports on the status of his research, and publishes the results in professional journals and at technical conferences. Engineer A has a long standing relationship with the university and is a tenured professor. He has received multiple honors and awards for his services. Engineer A highly values his reputation as a professor and researcher. Engineer A meets with the major commercial sponsor of his transportation research and present the results of his research in a paper, including charts, graphs, and other illustrative material. The commercial sponsor clearly has a significant interest in the research report and its conclusions and, subsequently, the commercial sponsor makes certain changes in the research report bearing Engineer A’s name without his knowledge and approval. The changes include altering report text, altering tables and removal of figures. Engineer A seeks assistance concerning the appropriate course of action.

QUESTION #1: Would Engineer A be ethical in taking action against the sponsor?

QUESTION #2: Was the sponsor ethical in altering Engineer A’s report?

NSPE Code of Ethics Case Study (COMMENTS BY ONE ENGINEER CONCERNING ANOTHER)

FACTS:

Engineer A practicing in State X requires the services of a structural engineer in State Y. Engineer A contacts Engineer B, who is the secretary of the State Y Society of Professional Engineers, to request the name of an appropriate engineer in State Y to perform the required structural engineering work. Engineer B suggests Engineer C , who Engineer A then decides to retain. Not satisfied with the services provided by Engineer C, including Engineer C’s lack of regular communication with Engineer A, Engineer A later contacts Engineer B and tells Engineer B of his general dissatisfaction with Engineer C, but does not first communicate this displeasure to Engineer C. Engineer A also remarks to Engineer B that he is interested in retaining the services of another structural engineer for the project. Soon thereafter, Engineer C contacts Engineer A and expresses his strong displeasure toward Engineer A for the comments he made to Engineer B.

QUESTIONS:

Question 1: Did Engineer A act ethically under the circumstances?

Question 2: Did Engineer B act ethically under the circumstances?

Question 3: Did Engineer C act ethically under the circumstances?