Human Values and Professional Ethics

Question: Discuss about the Human Values and Professional Ethics. Answer: Introduction: Engineer X is apparently one of the top most officials in State Y highway department. Engineer X would like to abandon his position and become an executive with an engineering/architecture firm. He requests permission from the government to give in a new position. The state declines to grant the permission, arguing that in accepting the request put forth, the engineer would be acting in contrary to the state laws. The provisions of the state laws are such that a senior highway official has to wait for at least one year after quitting State Y highway department before joining a private firm doing the business. Engineer X opts to quit the State Y highway department and joins the engineering/architecture firms as an independent contractor rather than as an employee. Conflict of interest as an ethical issue has been subjected to numerous discussions and arguments but the NSPE Board of Ethical Review and in most instances, conflict of interest has been displayed as a complex issue. However, for other cases, they have been straightforward and relatively simple to go about. Besides this case, among other cases of conflict of interest that have been considered by NSPE Board of Review of Ethical Review include BER Cases 06-10, 14-1 besides 14-8. In the Case 06-10, Engineer B, a manager in the quality assurance department at company W, noticed that the purchases manager of the company had gone into a supply contract with a new supplies company of plastic components. It came to be known that the production manager at the new supplier outlet was a spouse to the quality assurance manager, something that was not known to anyone in Company W. The quality assurance manager did not have a hand in creating such a situation hence had no efforts pressurize any party in relation to the dealings of the parties [3, pp. 65]. The Board of Ethical Review in making its final verdict required the engineer to give full disclosure that he was the husband of a key employee of a vendor to appropriate managers within his company. The board further required him to recuse himself from any categorical dealings with the vendo. The board claimed it could easily predict circumstances in which Engineer C, as a quality assurance manager, would be required to evaluate the quality of the products supplied by the vendor. In case any discrepancies and uncertainties arise with regard to the product then the engineer would find himself in a highly conflicted personal situation i.e. between the interests of his wife and her employer and the interests of his employer. In Case 14-8, an Engineer Z has been serving in a private engineering company in the department dealing with water rights. A client has hired the company to help him with the completion of the water-rights analysis, an undertaking in which Engineer Z took part. Together with another employee in the company, Engineer Z signed and sealed the final document. As part of the contract, these types of analysis set out terms and conditions that may be required to be approved by the law courts in the future, a process that takes an average of two years. The engineer did his part of the project as required by the process and resigned from the company to serve in the State, which was an objector in the water analysis project. The engineer feels he should stand by the services he delivered and which was part of the sealed report but he is bothered of the remaining steps in the court process. In his capacity in the state employment, he is isolated from the case of the State in the matter and his position does not allow him to oppose this case or any other cases. In this regard, the Board of Ethical Review decided that the engineer has a duty to honor his obligations both to the private client and his former employer. In this regard, the Board suggests the engineer should have been assigned other duties by the government and keep aloof from its case of water rights involving the engineer's former employer and client. The State should acknowledge and respect the engineer's ethical obligations in the case. Regarding the case in question, the Board of Review believes that the earlier cases are instructive. At the threshold, a potential conflict of interest lies between the obligations of Engineer X to his former employer, the state highway department, and the party with which the engineer is now contracting, the architecture/engineering firm. In as much as disclosure of information about the ongoings and intentions have been made, the Board, in its opinion, the disclosure itself is not sufficient for Engineer X to meet ethical requirements and provisions. At the same time, provision and agreement for a one-year break after quitting public service before accepting a related job is not supported by disguising the employment as independent contracting. The action by Engineer X to proceed and join the architecture/engineering firm as an independent contractor rather than as employees is one of the ways of circumventing state law. In this light, the Board of Ethical Review has a reason to believe that the actions of Engineer P were unethical. Conclusion It is against the provisions of the codes of engineering ethics for Engineer X to join the architecture/engineering firm as an independent contractor as opposed to an executive employee in such a way that is aimed at bending state laws and regulation. To avoid a repeat of the same incidence in the future I would advise engineers and clients to act fairly and loyalty is maintained to all stakeholders involved in the engineering profession. The loyalty comes along with the engineer expressing satisfaction in the contract work he has at hand that would see an outside client not conflict with his duty to his employer. Still, I would advise the engineers to act with the highest degree of integrity and personal honor in the dispensation of their professional duties [4, pp. 67]. References Clark, JR. Using and Understanding Engineering Service and Construction Contracts. Panama: Springer Science Business Media, 2012, pp. 198-654. Harris, CE. Engineering Ethics: Concepts and Cases. Kansas: Cengage Learning,2013, pp. 18-215. Holderness, RA. State-By-State Guide to Architect, Engineer, and Contractor Licensing. Coralville: Aspen Publishers Online,2005, pp. 210-315. Little, CH. A State-by-state Guide to Construction Design Law: Current Statutes and Practices. Chicago: American Bar Association,2009, pp. 356-914. Raghavan, BS. Human Values and Professional Ethics. London: S. Chand Publishing, 2005, pp. 45-98. Royakkers, L. Ethics, Technology, and Engineering: An Introduction. Beijing: John Wiley Sons, 2011, pp. 188-275. Society for Mining, MAE(S). Study Guide for the Professional Licensure of Mining and Mineral Processing Engineers. Washington: SME, 2008, pp. 615-645. Vesilind, PA. Hold Paramount: The Engineer's Responsibility to Society. Manchester: Cengage Learning, 2015, pp. 230-336.