CEN 800 - Chapter 7 – Ethical Problems of Engineers in Industry

Ethics Section – Chapter 7 – Ethical Problems of Engineers in Industry Engineers are mainly employees, and occasionally encounter pressures that constrain their ability to act professionally Frequent source of pressure is the employer However, other influences may affect the engineer’s ability to act professionally Things like trade secrets, conflicts of interest and confidentiality are some of these issues Employer Authority and Employee Duties: When an engineer becomes employed, a contract is created where the engineer agrees to use their ability the employer’s legitimate goals At the same time, the employer has a duty under the same contract to treat the engineer in a professional manager, and acquires the authority to direct the engineer However, over the length of a professional career, an engineer may be directed to do something that is morally wrong in their opinion In many well-published cases, the pressure on management to show a profit was converted into pressure on an engineer to act unethically Illegal Actions: An engineer may be asked to perform an act that they consider unethical, and is also clearly contrary to law If this is the case, the engineer should advise the employer that the action is illegal, and should resist any direction to break the law Employer clearly doesn’t have the authority to direct the engineer in breaking the law Actions Contrary to the Code of Ethics: An engineer may be asked to perform an act, where it may not be clearly illegal, it does breach the code of ethics In this case, the engineer should tell the employer about the appropriate section of the code that is being violated, and decline to take any action on the employer’s request The employer cannot direct the engineer to take action that clearly violates the code of ethics, even if the employer does or doesn’t know the code of ethics Actions Contrary to the Conscience of the Engineer: An engineer may be asked to perform an act where it may not clearly be illegal or breach the code of ethics, it conflicts with the engineer’s conscience, or moral code Engineer must gather all the relevant information and define the ethical problem as clearly as possible Refusal to follow an employer’s directive may result in disciplinary action, or dismissal if the employer cannot be convinced otherwise These consequences and remedies for wrongful dismissal should be considered by the engineer Professional Engineers and Labour Unions: Engineers have a right to fairness in negotiating pay scales, and other conditions of employment Sometimes, employers will fail to provide these basic conditions, and is usually faced with the dilemma of resigning, or taking part in collective action against the employer This creates a moral dilemma since the engineer has an obligation to the employer, but also to themselves, and to not accept unprofessional working conditions, or inadequate pay In every province, labour legislation guarantees the rights of employees to form unions, and negotiate in good faith with employers Although employee engineers are free to join existing labour unions within their company or industry, and if possible, they should form or join a collective group composed entirely of engineers PEO regulates the profession and protects the general public. OSPE was formed to protect engineers with insurance benefits, health benefits and so on Unethical Managers: In very rare cases, the management of a company may appear to be unethical An engineer who finds evidence of unethical acts should take immediate action to inform management of the problem Trouble can arise if management is unresponsive to arguments based on ethics This puts the engineer’s duty to the employer in direct conflict with the duty to public welfare, which is considered paramount Engineer must make an assessment of the situation and balance the risk to public welfare against overcoming management resistance to remedial action The engineer is generally faced with 3 possible courses of action should such a situation arise Engineer could continue to work with the company and try to correct company policy. This is preferable if the dishonest actions were very minor at best Engineer could continue to work for the company but they would alert external regulatory agencies that the company is acting dishonestly. This is commonly defined as whistleblowing. This is usually an unfriendly and unpleasant act However, if management refuse to take action to correct the problem, and the engineer has full knowledge of a clear and serious hazard to public, whistleblowing may be the last resort Engineer could resign in protest. This may be necessary where things can be complicated if the engineer stays with the company Case Study 7.1 – Accepting a Job Offer: Summary: When economic recession existed, an electrical engineering student, Joan Furlong, was about to graduate and wanted a permanent job with an electronics company She is interviewed by several electronics and power companies As she approaches graduation, she receives an offer from Algonquin Power Company to work on scheduling maintenance activities at their substations Salary is good, so she immediately accepts the offer 2 weeks later, she receives a letter from Ace Microelectronics offering her a position on a new project in digital circuits design – what she wanted to do all along Salary is approximately equal to the Algonquin job, but she may be out of a job when the project ends Furlong doesn’t know what to do, because she wants to work in digital circuit design, and not scheduling of maintenance activities She has three courses of action: 1. She could write to Algonquin, tell them her plans have changed and apologize for the inconvenience She knows the code of ethics of the association, but she isn’t a member yet, so she feels that she isn’t bound by the code 2. She could write to Algonquin Power, like choice #1, but offer to reimburse them for recruitment expenses that they have paid on her behalf 3. She could write to Ace Microelectronics and advise them that she has already accepted an offer from Algonquin Power, but might be in a position to join them on a later project in a few years time, when she finishes with Algonquin Question: Which of the above three alternatives is the best, from an ethical viewpoint? Authors’ Recommended Solution: Problem is not clearly defined in the code of ethics, however, almost every code says that an engineer has an obligation to act with good faith or good will towards clients, employees and employers First action is very unethical Furlong does have an obligation to Algonquin Power, and can’t be erased by a simple apology The second action will not suffice. The power company probably has sent rejection letters to other candidates, so they can save a spot for Furlong, and will lose more than recruitment costs The argument that Furlong isn’t bound by the code of ethics is unacceptable as a justification for her actions The third action seems the most ethical Furlong made a promise to Algonquin Power, and she has a duty to fulfill it However, it’s clear that the job isn’t in her field, and she chose it mainly for security purposes There is a probability that she won’t like her job, will regret the missed opportunity, and won’t be as good of a productive employee as the company would want and may leave in a few years Though the third action is the most ethical, it isn’t the most ideal Case Study 7.2: Slow Promotion and Job Dissatisfaction Summary: John Smith is a licensed P.Eng. in the jigs and fixtures group of the Dominion Press and Stamping Company It is a fairly large and privately owned manufacturing company Was first hired by Dominion during his final summer at university Then, they offered him a part-time job during his final year of university, and permanent position after graduation Smith learned a great deal during his first year on the job, which was almost entirely devoted to training He was sent away on a 2 month computer course and then given on-the-job familiarization with each of the three divisions in the company during the rest of his first year He decided to stay in the design division and worked there for 3 years Unfortunately, now he feels like he’s reached a dead end He has mastered all the skills necessary to carry out his present job However, the chance to move up is blocked by those working with him that have more seniority Also, his design job has become routine, and his request to transfer to the manufacturing division was denied because there weren’t any openings Also, they considered him to be too valuable in his current position As such, Smith feels very guilty about quitting to apply for another job, because he is sincerely grateful for the experience he obtained over the past 4 years with Dominion, and has an excellent work relationship with his co-workers He also knows that the company will have trouble replacing him Also, he feels it may be unethical to change jobs, since he has been fully trained and is of maximum benefit to the company He also knows that there are several open positions with rival manufacturing companies Question: Is it ethical for Smith to seek employment elsewhere? Author’s Recommended Solution: This problem happens often among engineers who are working their first full-time job in the industry Training periods for junior engineers usually take 1 to 2 years, and then when the engineer is finally a productive member of the company, they want to move on to better opportunities There’s now a dilemma. The employee clearly has an obligation to the employer, but they also have an obligation to themselves, to advance their career This kind of problem can’t just be solved by looking at the code of ethics When an employee accepts a training benefit, an implied contract is created A company invests in a new engineer during the training period, and this investment is returned during the period of useful employment that follows Using this concept of return on investment, we pretty much check out how much Smith gave back to the company in terms of income However, it isn’t easy to determine how much expense was incurred during the training period Common sense would dictate that if most of his first year consisted of training, then he would be obligated to remain for at least an equal time of one year to pay back the company As such, since Smith completed three years of service after the initial year of training, and no minimum period was specified in his contract, he’s probably satisfied his indebtedness he might have incurred As such, he shouldn’t feel guilty to go to a new job if he’s unable to advance, or transfer within the company Case Study 7.3 – Part-Time Employment (Moonlighting) Summary: Philip Fortescure is a licensed P.Eng. who has worked for Federal Structural Design for 10 years. Unfortunately, the company hasn’t made many large contracts, and his salary is very low His pay raises have rarely exceeded the cost of living over his 10 years of employment As such, he’s been forced to take on extra employment in his spare time, and he secretly brings the work from this job to his office in the evening He is careful to ensure that paper, pens and photocopying are paid out of his pocket He also argued that the computer is sitting idle in the evening anyway, so his employer is suffering no loss Also, Fortescue argues that his evening work benefits his employer, since it permits him to continue to work for Federal Structural Design even with his low salary Question: Is it ethical for Fortescue to carry on his part-time employment in this manner? Author’s Recommended Solution: Engineers commonly accept part-time employment, and in general, it isn’t unethical to work for more than one employer However, for the code of ethics, it indicates that the engineer must show fairness and loyalty to the employer This means that the part-time employer should not compete for the full-time employer’s contracts Also, the time and effort spent on doing the part-time job work during the evening (or moonlighting) should not reduce the employee’s efficiency during the usual workday However, the employer should be informed in order to verify this situation As such, Fortescue isn’t acting ethically in this case, since he hasn’t informed his employer of the part-time employment As such, the question of whether his part-time work will compete or conflict with his full-time job can’t be verified Also, the fact that the engineer has remained with the employer for 10 years with no promotion or significant increase in salary is very peculiar and implies that there are other factors that influence this case It also isn’t clear whether Fortescue is exploiting the employer’s facilities to make more income, or whether the employer is exploiting Fortescue by forcing him to carry two jobs to survive financially In any case, the engineer’s secrecy for his part-time job is clearly unethical Case Study 7.4 – Engineers as Members of Labour Unions Summary: Jeanne Giroux is a licensed P.Eng. working for Acme Automotive Manufacturing, a company that makes parts for cars and trucks She works in the design engineering office, and supervises the modification to parts She has frequent contact with the machinists in the manufacturing plant and observes that the shop union is very effective in negotiating terms and conditions for employment Union steward informs her that the employer is required by law to bargain in good faith with the union Also, there are procedures for arbitration in case of stalemates in negotiations The design engineering staff have had very low pay raises in recent years, don’t have long vacations, and have to work overtime Even though the engineers in the design engineering staff are P.Engs, the Association of Professional Engineering can’t help them with negotiating with their employer Association however has provided them with some data regarding engineering salaries Giroux notes that the average salary for the four engineers are 20% below the median salary for the appropriate group in the data Also, the company admin manual doesn’t mention anything about raises As a comparison, the sales staff in the company are paid partly on a commission basis, and always receive a higher pay than the engineers Giroux has been assured by the union steward that the design and engineering staff could be included in the bargaining group, if at least 60% of the employees in the engineering design department sign application forms Giroux believes all of them will sign when asked Question: Is it ethical for the staff to join the shop labour union? Author’s Recommended Solution: Yes, it is highly ethical for engineers to join labour unions, provided that the engineers don’t have any management authority in the company The staff aren’t considered to be management Even though it may be ethical and legal to join the union, it may not be appropriate Labour relations acts in some provinces allow professional engineers to form a bargaining unit, or union. This can be done directly through the labour board of the provincial government in most provinces However, establishing unions requires a lot of paper work and organization A more economical solution would be to make management aware of the staff’s dissatisfaction and of the routes open to solve the problem If the employer is uncooperative, it would be advisable to obtain legal advice, and examine unionization as a last resort Case Study 7.5 – False or Misleading Engineering Data in Advertising Summary: Audrey Adams is a licensed mechanical engineer with marine experience who works for a manufacturer of fibreglass pleasure boats She conducted buoyancy tests on all of the boats manufactured by the company She has rated the hull capacity of each boat according to the procedure specified by Transport Canada She observes in the company’s sales books that the boat hull rated for a maximum of five people has photos consistently showing six people on board The sales literature, however, appears to be correct in any case Adams is aware that the boat would be safe in still water with 6 people, but could be flooded and sink in rough water Adams believes the sales literature is misleading and possibly hazardous Question: What action should Adams take? Author’s Recommended Solution: Code of ethics for every professional association and technical society states that the welfare of the general public must be considered most important In this case, there’s a potential hazard to the public, and the engineer has an ethical duty to take action to reduce or eliminate this hazard Adams’s first step should be to inform the engineering manager about the problem You’d do this through an internal memo describing the errors in the sales literature If there are simple errors or oversights by the sales people, it can be easily rectified In rare instances, company management may be dishonest, like the data in the books had been altered, or the boats being manufactured were being sold with incorrect capacities stamped on their serial nameplates As such, the company management would be guilty of misrepresentation If a serious failure occurs, this fixed data would become public knowledge, and the engineer could be subject to investigation for possible unethical acts, incompetence, or collaborating with management in the misrepresentation As such, the engineer has to make a decision to dissociate themselves from any unethical activity, and in extremely rare cases, act as a whistleblower Case Study 7.6 – Disclosing Proprietary Information Summary: An aeronautical research engineer from Company A made tests of a new aircraft tail in his company’s wind tunnel The engineer knew that devastating vibrations could occur under certain circumstances, leading to the destruction of the aircraft Later at a meeting, Company A’s engineer hears an engineer from Company B, a competitor, describe the tail assembly configuration for one of Company B’s new aircraft that runs the same risk as to the discovery that Company A’s engineer has made In essence, there is an obligation in terms of ethics and law to maintain the company’s confidentiality regarding the knowledge obtained by Company A’s engineer However, engineers have a duty to safeguard public safety and welfare If Company A’s engineer doesn’t tell Company B what he has discovered, Company B might not discover these destructive vibrations until a crash occurs, killing people Also, since Company A cannot reveal this information to Company B, telling Company B that the configuration “will not work” won’t cut it for Company B Question: What would you do if you were the engineer from Company A? Author’s Recommended Solution: On one hand, with the code of ethics, engineers have an obligation to the employer to maintain the confidentiality of proprietary information The company has paid a lot to test the tail assembly, and it wouldn’t be fair to the employer if this information went to Company B However, if Company B is diligent in its testing and analysis like Company A, then it will discover the problem and the engineer won’t have to take action However, an engineer has an obligation under the code of ethics to consider the welfare of society as paramount If Company B fails to find this flaw, the engineer’s failure to follow the code of ethics will be clear As such, the duty to society is paramount over the loss of the advantage over Company B You would, of course, notify the employer before contacting Company B However, it isn’t the engineer’s duty to release detailed data, or to save money for your competitor All your obligations are is to make sure public safety isn’t endangered by Company B’s defective design As such, with the employer, you would determine what information you can disclose, and convey it in a direct and unambiguous way about the defective design