case study 2 engineering in society

ENGINEER IN SOCIETY

ABSTRACT The assignment outlines the professional codes of conduct relevant to BEM and adhered by professional engineers who serve to the society considering or exhibiting with legal, safety health, cultural and societal values. A certified professional engineer holds high dignity, ethics, professional, moral values in making decisions at the place of work. The main objective of this assignment is to examine, analyze and relate the ethical theories and the BEM (Board of Engineers Malaysia) Code of Professional Conduct and its guidelines to solve ethical, social, health, safety, legal, and cultural related issues in the practice of engineering in order to safe guard the respect and dignity of the Engineering Profession. Furthermore; in this assignment will learn about the ethical theory which use to reduce the impact inside the industry, as we learned there five elements of the ethics theory will be used to evaluate and analyze the cases study below in chapter two, those elements are Relativism, Utilitarianism, Virtue Ethics, Duty Ethics, and Right Ethics each one of these will be used in the scenarios below. Moreover; in this assignment will explain some codes of the BEM codes of Professional Conduct, this code consists of five elements which will mention in chapter3 each one of these codes divided into various codes to be used as a professional engineer to solve the issues which may face. In addition, will be selecting some of the BEM codes to solve the issue base on the problems which we have in chapter 2, there three case study each case study has different problems, furthermore, the last case study is the scenario which is given in the assignment to be analyzed. As a professional engineer must solve this issue by justify the solution for the case study and make sure there is no impact on the capacity and environment. Furthermore; will be using the drawing line analysis to identify the impact of the problems, as shown in chapter 3 there are a positive impact and negative impact by using this method we can identify if the problems are negative or positive then will solve this issue.

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot.

What's hot ( 20 )

Similar to ENGINEER IN SOCIETY

Similar to ENGINEER IN SOCIETY ( 20 )

More from Mahmood Ajabbar

More from Mahmood Ajabbar ( 8 )

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded ( 20 )

• 1. i ENGINEER IN SOCIETY (EE014-3.5-3-EIS) INDIVIDUAL ASSIGNMENT STUDENT NAME : MAHMOOD ABDULJABBAR STUDENT NUMBER : TP040947 INTAKE : APU4F1903PE PROGRAMME : PETROLEUM ENGINEERING LECTURER NAME : Ir. Dr. DHAKSHYANI A/P RATNADURAI ASIA PACIFIC UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY & INNOVATION FACULTY OF COMPUTING, ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING 30/9/2019
• 2. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENT I would like to thank God as the Creator of the world for all his help during the elaboration of this work and for keeping me alive and giving me the strength in the presence of weakness, in performing this assignment, I had to take the help and guidelines of some respected persons, who deserve my greatest gratitude, the completion of this report gives me much pleasure. I would like to show my deepest gratitude to Ir. Dr. DHAKSHYANI A/P RATNADURAI for giving me good guidelines for the report throughout numerous consultations. Moreover, I would also like to expand my gratitude to all those who have directly and indirectly guided me in writing this assignment. Moreover, I would like to express my gratitude towards my parents & my friends for their kind co-operation and encouragement which help me in completion of this assignment. I would like to express my special gratitude and thanks to all individuals for giving me such attention and time. My thanks and appreciations also go to APU University in developing the project and people who have willingly helped me out with their abilities.
• 3. iii ABSTRACT The assignment outlines the professional codes of conduct relevant to BEM and adhered by professional engineers who serve to the society considering or exhibiting with legal, safety health, cultural and societal values. A certified professional engineer holds high dignity, ethics, professional, moral values in making decisions at the place of work. The main objective of this assignment is to examine, analyze and relate the ethical theories and the BEM (Board of Engineers Malaysia) Code of Professional Conduct and its guidelines to solve ethical, social, health, safety, legal and cultural related issues in the practice of engineering in order to safe guard the respect and dignity of the Engineering Profession. Furthermore; in this assignment will learn about the ethical theory which use to reduce the impact inside the industry, as we learned there five elements of the ethics theory will be used to evaluate and analyze the cases study below in chapter two, those elements are Relativism, Utilitarianism, Virtue Ethics, Duty Ethics, and Right Ethics each one of this will be used in the scenarios below. Moreover; in this assignment will explain some codes of the BEM codes of Professional Conduct, this code consists of five elements which will mention in chapter3 each one of this code divided to various codes to be used as professional engineer to solve the issues which may face. In additional will be selecting some of the BEM codes to solve the issue base on the problems which we have in chapter 2, there three case study each case study has different problems, furthermore the last case study is scenario which is given in the assignment to be analyzed. As a professional engineer must solve this issue by justify the solution for the case study and make sure there is no impact on the capacity and environment. Furthermore; will be using the drawing line analysis to identify the impact of the problems, as shown in chapter 3 there are a positive impact and negative impact by using this method we can identify if the problems are negative or positive then will solve this issue.
• 4. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER NO. TITLE PAGE NO. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ii ABSTRACT iii TABLE OF CONTENTS iv LIST OF TABLES vii LIST OF FIGURES viii 1. INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Introduction 1 1.2 Research Problem 3 1.2.1 Structural Failures 4 1.2.2 Public Welfare 4 1.2.2 Professional Associations 4 1.3 Aim and Objectives 7 1.4 Justification for this research 8 1.5 Organization of the rest of the chapters 8 1.6 Summary 9
• 5. v CHAPTER NO. TITLE PAGE NO. 2. LITERATURE REVIEW 10 2.1 Introduction 10 2.2 Literature Review 10 2.2.1 BEM codes of Professional Conduct 10 2.2.2 Cases study 17 2.2.3 Ethical Theories 24 3. ETHICAL PROBLEM ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION 29 3.1 Introduction 29 3.2 Ethical Theories on the first case study (scenario) 29 3.2.1 Ethical Problem Analysis based on Ethical theories 29 3.2.2 BEM codes of Professional Conduct 31 3.2.3 Public Health Endangerment 33 3.2.4 DOE Legal Requirements 34 3.2.5 HSE Consideration 36 3.2.6 Approaches can be taken 36 3.3 Ethical Theories on the Second Scenario 37 3.3.1 Ethical Problem Analysis based on Ethical theories 37 3.3.2 Ethical Problem Analysis based on BEM codes 39 3.3.3 All Possible Solutions 42 3.3.4 Line Drawing Analysis 43
• 6. vi CHAPTER NO. TITLE PAGE NO. 3.4 Ethical Theories on the third case study (scenario given) 44 3.4.1 Ethical Problem Analysis based on Ethical theories 44 3.4.2 Ethical Problem Analysis based on BEM codes 45 3.4.3 All Possible Solutions 49 3.4.4 Line Drawing Analysis 51 4. CONCLUSION 53 3.1 Conclusion 53 3.2 References 55
• 7. vii LIST OF TABLES TABLE NO. TITLE PAGE NO. 2.1 RE shall at all times hold paramount the safety, health, etc 11 2.2 A Registered Engineer shall undertake assignments only 12 2.3 A Registered Engineer shall issue public statements only 13 2.4 A Registered Engineer shall act for each employer 13 2.5 RE shall conduct himself honorably, responsibly, and ethically 14 2.6 The selecting BEM’s Code of Professional Conduct. 22 2.7 Ethical Theories 27 3.1 Ethical Theories angle from the First scenario 30 3.2 Ethical Theories angle from the Second scenario 37 3.4 Ethical Theories angle from the Last scenario 45
• 8. viii LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE NO. TITLE PAGE NO. 1.1 Work Ethic 2 2.1 Sequence of Retrogressive Landslides 17 2.2 Additional loads to the building 19 2.3 Two columns that collapsed in the beginning 20 2.4 Before and after the building collapsed 20 3.1 Ethical Theories point chart 30 3.2 Line Drawing Analysis 37 3.3 Line drawing analysis for second scenario 44 3.4 Line drawing for last scenario 52
• 10. 1 CHAPTER 1 PROJECT SCOPE STATEMENT 1.1 INTRODUCTION Ethics is concerned with what society considers to be right or wrong. It, therefore, relates to standards of behavior. At first, this may appear to overlap with one purpose of the law, in that law seeks to address the behavior of which society disapproves. However, ethical principles may be adopted that discourage behavior that is undesirable but legal. For example, during the expenses scandal that arose in the UK in 2009 regarding claims for reimbursement by politicians, one politician responded to criticism by stating that she had done nothing illegal. This rather missed the point, as the general public may still regard legitimate expenses claims as inappropriate, and therefore unethical. (ACCA, 2011) The social aspect of multifaceted engineering sector forms one of the most intricate and complex continua of the profession. In fact, the biggest reason why engineering and the professionals involved are highly regarded, and respected, by the society may be because the decisions taken by engineers tend to have huge impacts, sometimes to an extent that the fate of a place, or many people is changed at a time. Social aspect of engineering is important to highlight because people, and society as a whole, often expect great things from engineers, owing to great ‘power’ they possess to bring change. But, with this great power comes greater responsibility (Arjun, 2011). Very often, the cause and effect between behavior and consequences are paradoxical; sometimes the impacts, both positive and adverse, are apparent and conspicuous, yet sometimes they are fraught with so much uncertainty that the impacts are pernicious. In this direction, the concept of ethics in engineering becomes crucial. (Shimizu, 2017)
• 11. 2 Engineers are also professionals after doctors, who operate this entire globe with their creative and investigative approach utilizing towards the emerging new technology. Engineers built the world to be a better place and they are Problem solvers and Solution providers to any complex engineering problems. Their knowledge is poured into automation, manufacturing, production, constructional, communication and so on. Hence, it is the most important for an Engineer to execute any action with utmost ethics and professionalism, taking into consideration the roles, responsibilities and duties while making decisions. (Shimizu, 2017) Figure 1.1: Work Ethic (Dezzera, 2018). The ethical problems from the scenario are critical. Environmental organization has become important especially in 1900s, when carbon rises on air. Regulations and limitations formed to stop anyone who trespassing environment and punishments required to companies that trespass it. Another ethical issue is every worker has a boss that give orders to him/her in exchange of payment, orders come from managing director to buy equipment from UTS, yet it conflicts with the first issue. (Whitbeck, 2011). Third ethical issue is the difficulty of finding a job and how unethical to fire someone caring about regulations or listening blindly to the manager. Case become more complicated and exhausting. In history, similar situations happened and lesson learn. A lot of rules and regulations formed to organize the relationship between workers-manager, workers-workers, managers-managers and managers-
• 12. 3 organizations. Here, worker-manager and worker-organization with the company is in the stake. (Whitbeck, 2011). Facts stated from regulations formed by organizations such as IEM, BEM, DOE, HSE and WFEO. All these are related to the situation. The initials for these organizations are: • IEM: Institute of Engineering and Management. • BEM: Board of Engineers Malaysian. • DOE: Department of Environment. • HSE: Health and Safety Executive. • WFEO: World Federation of Engineering Ethical problems for engineering are complex and can involve opposition on ethical codes. Engineer must study on depth all the codes related to the issue and form a decision supported with codes, so he/she has rights. Many cases do not have lining and clear path in ethical principles, but they have corrected and appropriate solutions. (Arjun, 2011). The main points of discussion are: 1. Discussing the issue and how to rectify the situation from an ethical point of view knowing the code of conduct of IEM/ BEM or WFEO. 2. What are the legal requirements of DOE? 3. What HSE has to say in the long run with the project? 4. What is the rightest approach to deal with the issue? The points will form three paths with justifications, the most right one has the strongest ground. 1.2 Research Problem One of the problems happens with Ir. Jason. Ir. Jason is a certified professional engineer who works at XY Chemical Factory. Ir. Jason is responsible for checking and monitoring the disposable of chemical wastes from the factory which is stored in a warehouse at an off-site location. He reports to Ir. Daniel who is the Head of XY’s Division of Chemical Waste. In the course of his work, Ir. Jason discovered that there are several leaking drums. Ir. Jason tried to inform this matter to Ir. Daniel. Ir. Daniel responded by telling to Ir. Jason that he will bring few workers to bring back the leaking drums to the factory and dispose of it through the river
• 13. 4 situated behind XY Chemical Factory as what he has been always doing it. So, based on the BEM codes how can Ir. Jason. solves this issue which has been happened as explained. 1.2.1 Structural Failures Engineering took on much more importance in everyday life after the Industrial Revolution. Large-scale engineering projects came to dominate the landscape of most major countries. Highlighting the importance of solid engineering were the structural failures of several notable landmarks, such as the Quebec Bridge in 1907, which cost many lives. Engineering ethics began to take on a supreme importance in this way, as people learned that lives depended on a well-crafted design (Reader, 2017). 1.2.2 Public Welfare Similar to the Hippocratic oath in medicine, the first duty of the engineer is to protect the welfare and safety of the public -- do no harm. This means being completely certain of the integrity of any structure and thoroughly testing the safety of any product, even if there is temptation to cut corners or overlook a concern that would be inconvenient. The purpose of establishing professional ethics is to enforce a minimal standard (Reader, 2017). 1.2.3 Professional Associations As engineers became more prominent and important to society following the Industrial Revolution, many different engineering societies came about. These societies generally follow a certain specialization of engineering, such as the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. Such organizations seek very prominently to promote ethical concerns within the field, and they typically have an explicit code of ethics they expect all members to follow. Members can be expelled if they are found in violation. Ethics in engineering is a study of characteristics of morals and conduct of engineers as professionals and individuals as human beings. The moral and practical significance of ethics vis-à-vis engineering can be related with the quality of the decisions: with justice, with equity, with the consequences for all
• 14. 5 affected by the decision, and with the personal and collective responsibilities which lie beyond the contractual obligations into which engineers are often bound. Engineering, like ethical problems, rarely have a single readily deduced solution. Both of these contain a range of solutions that are clearly right, relatively better or not appropriate at all. Prompt and correct distinction and selection of the available options is critical in engineering. For example, a product designed or a service rendered may benefit a party but at the expense of ecological balance of a place, or its social harmony. Ethics, in this case, probably dictates the use and strong enforcement of risk-benefit analysis option. Similarly, in cases where an engineer faces strong moral dilemma, or even ethical or legal conflicts, engineering ethics seeks to go beyond the dictates of the law when there is no legal guideline for how to solve the conflict. Therefore, ethics empowers engineers and fosters in them the value of conscientious moral commitment. (Reader, 2017). Ethics also guides the professional conduct of engineers. In essence, ethical values ensure honest and open transactions in the profession, and that the professionals are able to work without external pressure or biasedness. Ethics also ensures that engineers are held accountable for their actions, so they recognize and accept the personal commitment towards the client and the job, and maintain discretion over the client information. The role of ethics, therefore, in engineering is imperative because the integrity of the profession depends on it. The idea of not incorporating ethics into engineering is too big a risk. Only ethical engineering practices can actualize the true essence of engineering-transforming lives of people for the greater good that have been enduring unjust hardship and difficult living conditions. Thus, ethics in engineering ensures economy, productivity, safety, privacy, security, welfare and offers opportunities for all without discrimination. Vales and virtues are cultivated and appreciated by all human beings. These, therefore, becomes even more important to an engineer who is always in the midst of the common people discharging his responsibilities. Ethics not only improve quality of an individual but the quality of life as a whole. Related to the case, Although the primary ethical issue raised in the case is whistle blowing, secondary ethical issues include the obligations of engineers with respect to environmental issues, management problems having to do with honesty and trust between business and its host community, the issue of the
• 15. 6 fairness of a community towards manufacturing plants, the problems raised for individuals and groups by the necessity for action in the face of inconclusive scientific evidence, and the relationship of law and morality. Ram obligation to hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public in the performance of his professional duties, is probably among the most basic. Clearly, its importance is evident by the fact that it is the very first obligation stated in the NSPE Code of Ethics. Moreover, the premise upon which professional engineering exists-the engineering registration process is founded upon the proposition that in order to protect the public health and safety, the state has an interest in regulating by law the practice of the profession (Reader, 2017). The breadth and scope of this fundamental obligation is far more difficult to fix. As we have long known, ethics frequently involves a delicate balance between competing and, of times, conflicting obligations. However, it seems clear that where the conflict is between one important obligation or loyalty and the protection of the public, for the engineer the latter must be viewed as the higher obligation. In finding that an engineer does not have an ethical obligation to continue an effort to secure a change in the policy of an employer under these circumstances, or to report his concerns to the proper authority, we stated, nevertheless, that the engineer has an ethical "right" to do so as a matter of personal conscience. We emphasized, however, that the case then before us did not directly involve the protection of the public safety, health, and welfare, but rather was an internal dispute between an employer and an employee. In the context of this case, we do not believe that Ram's act of reporting his concerns to John or to certain members of the city council constituted a reporting to the "proper authorities" as intended under the Code. Nor do we believe, Ram's decision to assume no responsibility for the plant and beds constitutes a "withdrawal from further service on the project." It is clear under the facts of this case that Ram was aware of a pattern of ongoing disregard for the law by his immediate superior as well as members of the city council. After several attempts to modify the views of his superiors, it is our view that Ram knew or should have known that the "proper authorities" were not the city officials, but more probably state officials (i.e., state water pollution control authority). We cannot find it credible that a Director of Public Works for a medium-sized town would not be aware of this basic obligation. Ram's inaction
• 16. 7 permitted a serious violation of the law to continue and appeared to make Ram an "accessory" to the actions of John and the others. (NSPE, 1988) It is difficult for us to say exactly at what point Ram should have reported his concerns to the "appropriate authorities." However, we would suggest that such reporting should have occurred at such time as Ram was reasonably certain that no action would be taken concerning his recommendations either by John or the members of the city council and, that in his professional judgment, a probable danger to the public safety and health then existed. (NSPE, 1988) In addition, we find it troubling that Ram would permit his professional integrity to be compromised in the manner herein described. Ram allowed his engineering authority to be circumvented and overruled by a non-engineer under circumstances involving the public safety. It is clear that Ram had an ethical obligation to report this occurrence to the "proper authorities" as stated above. 1.3 Aim and Objectives The objective of this assignment is to examine, analyze and relate the ethical theories and the BEM (Board of Engineers Malaysia) Code of Professional Conduct and its guidelines to solve ethical, social, health, safety, legal and cultural related issues in the practice of engineering in order to safe guard the respect and dignity of the Engineering Profession. 1. To identify issues and challenges as an engineer after graduation 2. To promote awareness of engineers’ code of ethics at the workplace 3. To highlight the responsibilities of engineers towards their organization and community 4. To provide guidance on code of ethics to engineers in their respective branch of engineering 5. To expose the importance of environmental preservation in any projects undertaken 6. To create an understanding of the need to adhere to Ethics 7. To inform the importance of Ethics for Professionals
• 17. 8 1.4 Justification for this research This research provides easy to follow steps to help you define, analyze, understand and solve ethical problems. The ethics of professionals are different from the ethics of the community at large Conduct which would be unethical by community standards is ethical within the context of a profession. This article examines the ways in which a different professional ethic can be justified and, by reference to a contemporary play, considers the consequences of such justifications. 1.5 Organization of the rest of the chapters In this assignment will analyze the development of engineering in the context of social, health, safety, legal, culture and what is expected of engineers. Moreover; will be evaluating the engineering practice pertaining to management and legal consideration. Furthermore; in this assignment, there are four chapters, in the chapter one which is introduction will talk in general about the BEM codes and ethics rules Chapter 2 reviews the work is done by other researches based on the scenarios there are three scenarios will be analyzed base on the BEM codes, safety, health and so on. Furthermore; in this chapter will be explained about BEM codes with explanation for each code, then will be used a similar case study to be analyzed, there are several codes such as Professional Engineer with practicing certificate codes, Professional engineer codes, Graduate engineer codes, Engineering technologist codes, and Inspector of works codes. in additional will be explained the ethical theories to analyze the three-case study. Chapter 3 briefly explain the ethical problems analysis and discussion for each case study above, furthermore in this chapter 4 will involve the outcomes during the analysis and research period. Furthermore, will show the steps to solve the issue that happens for the scenarios above. Moreover; in this chapters will be using the EBM codes to solve the problems in each scenario and also will use the Line Drawing Analyses (LDA) to identify the impact of each case study, for each scenario will be using the Line Drawing Analyses to rescue the impact. Chapter 4 briefly summaries all the works of this assignment. Moreover; it will summaries chapter the literature review and what has been explained in this
• 18. 9 chapter, also will explained about ethical problems analysis and discussion in brief for each case study. 1.6 Summary In this chapter, it explained and discussed several parts to give a clear idea of this assignment and how this assignment can help the industry in the future, also it explains what the process of the next chapter and what to do on it. First of all; it has been writing an introduction to the Ethics and EBM codes. The introduction was explained with general information and discussed out to the specifications of the assignment. Furthermore; has been mention about the main objective of this assignment. In addition, the development of this assignment was justified as well.
• 19. 10 CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Introduction The main goal of this chapter is to review and examine the similar cases of the same scenario. How engineers can apply the professional conduct code of BEM and the ethical theory. Then, the first part emphasis on the code of professional conduct. The second part focuses on the ethical theories. The last part of this chapter describes similar cases to the given scenario. Moreover; this chapter discussed some cases, where the BEM code of professional conduct and ethical theories were breached by an individual or by an organization; and for the given scenario, the conducts that were breached were highlighted. The codes selections were performed according to the similarity of the scenario of the case provided; and the ethical codes are further analyzed using examples. 2.2 Literature Review 2.2.1 BEM codes of Professional Conduct: Engineers must follow the Board of Engineers (BEM) Malaysia, professional codes of conduct as a professional engineer and must be ethical. There are five major ethical code section with twenty-seven sub sections under. The most relevant and important section of codes are explained in this literature and they are as follows: 1.0 A Registered Engineer shall at all times hold paramount the safety, health and welfare of the public. 2.0 A Registered Engineer shall undertake assignments only if he is qualified by education and experience in the specific technical fields in which he is involved. 3.0 A Registered Engineer shall issue public statements only in an objective and truthful manner.
• 20. 11 4.0 A Registered Engineer shall act for each employer or clients as faithful agent or trustee. 5.0 A Registered Engineer shall conduct himself honorably, responsibly, ethically and lawfully so as to enhance the honor, reputation and usefulness of the profession. Code 1.0 A Registered Engineer shall at all times hold paramount the safety, health and welfare of the public. A Registered Engineer shall at all times hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public. This code is very important to be adhered by the Professional engineer, so any person must consider safety, health, and welfare, which means that any professional engineer must consider all parts of BEM codes to make sure there is no impact for the society and environment Table 2.1: Registered Engineer shall at all times hold paramount the safety, health and welfare of the public (TAN, 2004). 1.1 A Professional Engineer shall approve and sign only those engineering documents that he has prepared or are prepared under his direct supervision. 1.2 A Professional Engineer shall certify satisfactory completion of a piece of work only if he has control over the supervision of the construction or installation of that work, and only if he is satisfied that the construction or installation has fulfilled the requirements of the engineering design and specifications. 1.3 A Registered Engineer shall not reveal facts, data or information without the prior consent of the client or employer except as authorized or required by law or when the withholding of such information is contrary to the safety of the public. 1.4 A Registered Engineer having knowledge of any violation of this code and Local Authorities regulations shall report thereon to appropriate professional bodies and, when relevant, also to public authorities and cooperate with the proper authorities in furnishing such information or assistance as may be required. 1.5 When the professional advice of a Professional Engineer is overruled and amended contrary to his advice, the Professional Engineer shall, if the amendment may in his opinion give rise to situation that may endanger life and/or property, notify his employer or client and such other authority as may be appropriate and explain the consequences to be expected as a result of his advice being overruled and amended.
• 21. 12 Code 2.0 A Registered Engineer shall undertake assignments only if he is qualified by education and experience in the specific technical fields in which he is involved. This code explains that a registered Professional Engineer has full control over the work allocated or in full control of the supervision done within his/her area. Codes such as 2.1, and 2.2 gives the registered professional engineer to hold on the tasks and jobs certified, in order to ensure the verification requirements. By this code, the registered professional engineer has the control of all work done before signing and is accountable and answerable for any signature on inspection of materials, or design being approved, under his/her supervision. Furthermore, the registered Engineer shall undertake assignments only if he is qualified by education and experience in the specific technical fields in which he is involved. Moreover, the registered professional engineer is solely responsible for the social welfare with utmost trust, honesty, legal, safety and cultural upholds. If the registered professional engineer overcomes any of the ethics, they must be faced with the consequences accordingly. In case of any, overrule of his supervision by the superiors must report to the BEM, in view of any violation or irregularity of any code of conduct of professional engineers that might affect the quality of work. Furthermore, the decision or advice pertaining to any given services related to the engineering work should be given only by the practicing certified professional engineer and not by any other person. Table 2.2: A Registered Engineer shall undertake assignments only if he is qualified by education and experience in the specific technical fields in which he is involved (TAN, 2004). 2.1 A Professional Engineer shall not affix his signature to any plan or document dealing with subject matter in which he lacks competence, nor to any plan or document not prepared under his direction and control. 2.2 A Professional Engineer shall not accept assignment and assume responsibility for coordination of an entire project and sign and stamp (P.E. stamp) the engineering documents for the entire project unless each technical segment of the project is signed and stamped personally by the qualified engineer who has prepared the respective segment of the project.
• 22. 13 Code 3.0 A Registered Engineer shall issue public statements only in an objective and truthful manner. This code must be adhered by the Registered Professional Engineer in order to avoid getting benefits for work in terms of corruption or bribes, in the form of gifts. So, he/she should not accept any gifts in any form. The professional engineer must be ethical and professional to work done but is entitled to get promotions, increments and bonus. Table 2.3: A Registered Engineer shall issue public statements only in an objective and truthful manner (TAN, 2004). 3.1 A Registered Engineer shall be objective and truthful in professional reports, statements and testimony. He shall include all relevant and pertinent information in such reports, statements, or testimony, which should bear the date indicating when it was current. 3.2 A Registered Engineer may express publicly only technical opinions that are founded upon his competence and knowledge of the facts in the subject matter. 3.3 A Registered Engineer shall not issue statement, criticism or argument on technical matter that is inspired or paid for by interested parties, unless he has prefaced his comments by explicitly identifying the interested parties on whose behalf he is speaking and by revealing the existence of any interest he may have in the matter. Code 4.0 A Registered Engineer shall act for each employer or clients as faithful agent or trustee. Table 2.4: A Registered Engineer shall act for each employer or clients as faithful agent or trustee (TAN, 2004). 4.1 A Registered Engineer shall disclose all known or potential conflicts of interest that could influence or appear to influence his judgement or the quality of his services. 4.2 A Registered Engineer shall not accept compensation, financial or otherwise, from more than one party for services on the same project, or for services pertaining to the same project, unless the circumstances are fully disclosed and agreed to by all interested parties.
• 23. 14 4.3 A Registered Engineer shall not solicit or accept financial or other valuable consideration, directly or indirectly, from outside agents in connection with the work for which he is responsible. 4.4 A Registered Engineer as advisor or director of a company or an agency shall not participate in decision with respect to particular services solicited or provided by him or his organization. 4.5 A Registered Engineer shall not solicit or accept a contract from a body or agency on which a principal or officer of his organization served as a member of that body or agency unless with knowledge and consent of that body or agency. 4.6 A Registered Engineer while acting in his professional capacity shall disclose in writing to his client of the fact if he is a director or member of or substantial shareholder in or agent for any contracting or manufacturing company or firm or business or has any financial interest in any such company or firm or business, with which he deals on behalf of his client. 4.7 All professional advice shall be given in good faith. Code 5.0 A Registered Engineer shall conduct himself honourably, responsibly, ethically and lawfully so as to enhance the honour, reputation and usefulness of the profession. Table 2.5: A Registered Engineer shall conduct himself honourably, responsibly, ethically and lawfully so as to enhance the honour, reputation and usefulness of the profession (TAN, 2004). 5.1 A Registered Engineer shall not falsify his qualifications or permit misrepresentation of his or his associates' qualifications. He shall not misrepresent or exaggerate his responsibility in or for the subject matter of prior assignments. Brochures or other presentations incident to the solicitation of employment shall not misrepresent pertinent facts concerning employers, employees, associates, joint venturers, or past accomplishments. 5.2 A Registered Engineer shall not offer, give, solicit or receive, either directly or indirectly, any contribution to influence the award of a contract which may be reasonably construed as having the effect of intent to influencing the award of a contract. He shall not offer any gift or other valuable
• 24. 15 consideration in order to secure work. He shall not pay a commission, percentage or brokerage fee in order to secure work. 5.3 A Registered Engineer shall check with due diligence the accuracy of facts and data before he signs or endorses any statement or claim. He shall not sign on such documents unless, where necessary, qualifications on errors and inaccuracies have been made. 5.4 A Registered Engineer shall respond, within reasonable time, to communication from the Board or any other relevant authority on matter pertaining to his professional service. 5.5 A Registered Engineer shall not maliciously injure or attempt to maliciously injure whether directly or indirectly the professional reputation, prospect or business of another Engineer. 5.6 A Registered Engineer shall not directly or indirectly (1) Supplant or attempt to supplant another Engineer; (2) Intervene or attempt to intervene in or in connection with engineering work of any kind which to his knowledge has already been entrusted to another Engineer; or (3) Take over any work of another Engineer acting for the same client unless he has (i) Obtained a letter of release from the other Engineer or obtain such letter through the client, provided that this requirement may be waived by the Board; or (ii) Been formally notified by the client that the services of that other Engineer have been terminated in accordance with the provisions of any contract entered into between that Engineer and the client; provided always that, in case of dispute over non-payment or quantum of any outstanding fees, the client shall request the Board to be the stakeholder under the provision of Section 4(1)(e)(ea) 5.7 Except with the prior approval of the Board, a Registered Engineer shall not be a director or executive of or substantial shareholder in or agent for any contracting or manufacturing company or firm or business related to building or engineering. If such approval is given, such Engineer shall not undertake any contract work wherein he is engaged as a consulting engineer in such project unless it is in respect of a "design and build" project.
• 25. 16 5.8 A Registered Engineer shall not be a medium of payment made on his client's behalf unless he is so requested by his client nor shall he, in connection with work on which he is employed, place contracts or orders except with the authority of and on behalf of his client. 5.9 A Registered Engineer shall not (1) Offer to make by way of commission or any other payment for the introduction of his professional employment; or (2) Except as permitted by the Board, advertise in any manner or form in connection with his profession. 5.10 A Professional Engineer in private practice shall not without the approval of the Board enter into professional partnership with any person other than a Professional Engineer in private practice, a Registered Architect, a Registered Quantity Surveyor or a licensed Land Surveyor. MBOT GUIDELINES FOR CODE OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT Five (5) Main Section for Code of Ethics 1. A Registered Engineer shall at all times hold paramount the safety, health and welfare of the public. 2. A Registered Engineer shall undertake assignments only if he is qualified by education & experience in the specific technical fields in which he is involved. 3. A Registered Engineer shall issue public statements only in an objective and truthful manner. 4. A Registered Engineer shall act for each employer or clients as faithful agent or trustee. 5. A Registered Engineer shall conduct himself honourably, responsibly, ethically and lawfully so as to enhance the honour, reputation and usefulness of the profession.
• 26. 17 2.2.2 Cases study Case study (1) Danish Kazmi1 Sadaf Qasim S. H. Harahap & Syed Baharom (2017), discussed the popular accident of landslide of highland towers 1993. The results of the research found that ignoring safety measurements and environmental concerns can lead to disastrous outcome. Slope engineering is concentrated on landslides. Nowadays, landslides occur due to gross mistake or Labour faults. A lot of factors determine the accident on that day, the most one is an engineering team being stingy and money greed to finish project quickly and save money. The drainage lines were jammed and inefficient (Danish,Sadaf &Syed, 2017). The paper was searching by investigating via fault tree analysis (FTA) to study human error caused to fail the people who died. The chances of landslide in different event were studied, but due to other factors. Figure 2.1: Sequence of Retrogressive Landslides (Danish,Sadaf &Syed, 2017) Figure 2.1 shows the causes of the landslide, the instability of the rail pile foundation, which was not built for lateral loading. Also, lack of maintenance of drains with inadequate provision of drainage. (Diamond, 1985).
• 27. 18 Comparing this case with our case, indicates when it comes to life related project, everything has to be carefully done. Choosing environment over making more money is the right call that was not made that day. In another study, Roli Varma & Daya R. Varma wrote about The Bhopal Disaster of 1984. The world’s worst industrial disaster in Bhopal, India, occurred because of inadequate maintenance by Union Carbide and poor monitoring by the Indian authorities. Malfunctioning safety measurements, inappropriate location of the plant, and lack of information about the identity and toxicity of the gas that had effects for long term. On December 2, 1984. Approximately, 30 of the 42 metric tons of MIC stored in Tank 610 of the UCIL pesticide plant leaked with high velocity in 45-60 minutes causing clouds of death. The dense cloud of the heavier-than-air gas. Ignoring environment caused a disaster, spending extra money for avoiding a historical disaster and pile of lawsuits sounds like a clear decision. Exposing everyone’s live for extra cash and delay is non-negotiate. The careless actions toward environment were unbelievable. MIC was stored in three tanks, each with a capacity of 15,000 gallons. All the tanks used and none left for emergency, plus it supposed to be half used not fully used. In US, Germany and Japan tanks expected never be used in huge quantity. In Bhopal. Tank 610 had 6.4 tons of MIC that been reserved for 55 days before the accident. It was fully occupied with the gas. The Tank 610 was 87% full, which is far above the recommended capacity of 50% (Diamond, 1985). The company saved money by avoiding buying refrigerators to keep the gas cold. Another, careless action is reducing important staff to save money over safety. The staff reduced from 12 operators, 3 supervisors, 2 maintenance supervisors, and 1 superintendent per shift to 6 operators, 1 supervisor, and no obligatory superintendent (R.Varma, 1986). This extreme case clearly supports buying the chimney in order to avoid disasters in future (Danish,Sadaf &Syed, 2017)
• 28. 19 Case Study 2: Sulaima et al., (2014) presented the case study of the Hotel New World tragedy. The building was collapsed on the 15th March 1986 and post the collapse, an investigation was done to determine the major cause. Some of the major causes speculated were swampy land, bad concrete mixture and internal explosion, however the actual cause was found to be due to miscalculation in the design stage by the engineer. This has led to the building failure. This includes the endorsement of the Building Control act 1989 along with Building control regulation 1989 as a stricter quality measure. (Sulaima, Lew & Azily, 2014) The analysis inferred that this mistake has happened due to Engineer’s negligence in carrying out his/her duties. The case study concluded that duty ethics and right ethics were not adhered by the engineer which has led to the collapse of the Hotel New World. (Sulaima, Lew & Azily, 2014) The ethical issues raised through this case study are as follows: • Why the engineer design calculations were wrong? • Were the building materials used superior and were in correct ratio? • How did the engineer signoff without verifying? • Did the engineer abide his duties ethically? Figure 2.2: Additional loads to the building (Sulaima, Lew & Azily, 2014)
• 29. 20 Figure 2.3: Two columns that collapsed in the beginning (Sulaima, Lew & Azily, 2014) Figure 2.4: Before and after the building collapsed. (Sulaima, Lew & Azily, 2014)
• 30. 21 Case Study 3 which is given in the assignment: Ir. Jason is a certified professional engineer who works at XY Chemical Factory. Ir. Jason is responsible for checking and monitoring the disposable of chemical wastes from the factory which is stored in a warehouse at an off-site location. He reports to Ir. Daniel who is the Head of XY’s Division of Chemical Waste. In the course of his work, Ir. Jason discovered that there are several leaking drums. Ir.Jason tried to inform this matter to Ir.Daniel. Ir.Daniel responded by telling to Ir.Jason that he will bring few workers to bring back the leaking drums to the factory and dispose it through the river situated behind XY Chemical Factory as what he has been always doing it. Ir.Jason mentioned to Ir.Daniel that the law forbids from returning chemical waste to the factory site and requires it to be disposed according to the Department of Environment laws. However, Ir.Daniel is just not willing to listen to Ir.Jason as he questions why the need to bother when there are no problems that will be faced by XY Chemical Factory. Ir. Jason is in a dilemma as he wishes to continue working here and has no plans to resign or find another job. Ir.Jason is worried that wrong procedure of chemical wastes disposal will be hazardous to human kind and nature; even casualties if not solved at the right time which could lead to XY Chemical Factory getting into serious legal difficulties. As an Engineer, analyze and justify: 1. Ir. Jason’s professional responsibilities in this situation. 2. Ir. Daniel’s responsibilities to XY Chemical Factory. 3. XY Chemical Factory responsibilities in this situation. 4. How you would respond to this situation. From the cases study above will be used some codes of BEM codes, based on this code will analyze for each case study, also will solve the impact of this scenarios to be more ethical and environmentally. Furthermore, in this assignment will solve some of the ethical issues which happened before the solution will be based on BEM codes, ethical theories and line drawing analysis. BEM’s Code of Professional Conduct for the cases study Based on the Board of Engineers Malaysia (2004), CIRCULAR NO. 001 guidelines for Code of Professional Conduct (BEM/RD/PPC/08) the professional conduct are shown on table 2.10. Moreover, has been selecting some of the BEM
• 31. 22 codes to solve the problems for the cases above each case has different problems and also each problem needs some codes to follow. Table 2.6: The selecting BEM’s Code of Professional Conduct. Code Number BEM’s Code 1.1 A Professional Engineer shall approve and sign only those engineering documents that he has prepared or are prepared under his direct supervision. 1.2 A Professional Engineer shall certify satisfactory completion of a piece of work only if he has control over the supervision of the construction or installation of that work, and only if he is satisfied that the construction or installation has fulfilled the requirements of the engineering design and specifications. 1.5 When the professional advice of a Professional Engineer is overruled and amended contrary to his advice, the Professional Engineer shall, if the amendment may in his opinion give rise to situation that may endanger life and/or property, notify his employer or client and such other authority as may be appropriate and explain the consequences to be expected as a result of his advice being overruled and amended. 2.2 A Professional Engineer shall not accept assignment and assume responsibility for coordination of an entire project and sign and stamp (P.E. stamp) the engineering documents for the entire project unless each technical segment of the project is signed and stamped personally by the qualified engineer who has prepared the respective segment of the project. 3.1 A Registered Engineer shall be objective and truthful in professional reports, statements and testimony. He shall include all relevant and pertinent information in such reports, statements, or testimony, which should bear the date indicating when it was current. 4.2 A Registered Engineer shall not accept compensation, financial or otherwise, from more than one party for services on the same project, or
• 32. 23 for services pertaining to the same project, unless the circumstances are fully disclosed and agreed to by all interested parties. 5.1 A Registered Engineer shall not falsify his qualifications or permit misrepresentation of his or his associates' qualifications. He shall not misrepresent or exaggerate his responsibility in or for the subject matter of prior assignments. Brochures or other presentations incident to the solicitation of employment shall not misrepresent pertinent facts concerning employers, employees, associates, joint venturers, or past accomplishments. 5.5 A Registered Engineer shall not maliciously injure or attempt to maliciously injure whether directly or indirectly the professional reputation, prospect or business of another Engineer. Table 2.6 shows professional codes of conduct related to our scenarios. In code 1.1, an engineer must have knowledge of every paper signed. The signing must be aware of all consequences. The engineer must make a statement about the confirmation of equipment. Code 1.2, the engineer must respond and obey the employer to provide service suitable to the scenario. Despite the environment, the engineer should listen to the boss. In code 1.2, the engineer takes tasks that he/she has the ability to meet. The qualification must be met with experience. The job assigned is complicated and needs an experienced engineer. Code 1.5, before signing and giving the approval to the project, the engineer should know the givens and consequences excluding manager orders and be justified in decision making, because managers think about making money and skip environmental regulation. Code 2.2 responsibility is big in the case because almost RM550000 involved and environment approval considerations, the job assigned is huge and engineer must not sign documents if it is not under his/her scope of work. Everyone has scope of work and engineer must refuse to be involved. In codes related to engineer with control over supervision. Code 2.2 states that engineer should satisfy tasks he/she assigned for. Completion is a must if supervisory work is given. Building chimney is supervised by an engineer, so in
• 33. 24 this code, there is no upper managerial effect on the decision even though, the manager requires job to be done for profit and time. Code 5.1, taking the job means full responsibility on that piece of work. Building chimney or side with environmental approval from DOE are two different approaches and the responsibility is huge in a matter of your job, it is either a suicidal move in terms of your career or a thrived step in your career. Code 5.5, overruling your decision as an engineer, the engineer can defend himself/herself if and only if there is a danger to safety. The environment is endangered if the company ignore building chimney. DOE approval is important to clear your name, so any threat to public and health won’t concern you later with DOE approval. 2.2.3 Ethical Theories: Ethical theories play a vital role in making ethical decisions that are very apt as the solution to the complex engineering problem addressed. They form the basic guidance in providing the fundamentals of Ethical principles, and theories related to decision making. There are four major ethical theories to be adapted for decision making to solve complex engineering principle. Moral theories are found to help us understand ethical cases that encounter engineers. Harris and Rabins (2014) described it as the terms in uniform ways and links ideas with problems together inconsistent ways. They are not algorithms to rectify complex dilemmas, they give guidance and systemic understanding. In engineering, applied ethics have to be known by engineers, because they become handy and assist us in solving problems. In our scenarios, been selected to take harsh decision is unfair, but it is part of the job you signed for. Either you side with the environment or your scope of work and ignore DOE without paying extra RM555000 for chimney. Ethical theories in engineering are varied in different cases. The theories that can be used in our cases are: a. Relativism Ethics of Relativism is defined to relativity of morality. It depends on the society’s morality of being whether right or wrong depending on the practice done. This is because, an action or solution in one country or society would be correct while the same in another country or society may be wrong. For example,
• 34. 25 it is quite common and legal to possess a gin in Yemen, while it is not common and legal to possess the same in Malaysia. Thus, it depends on the relativity. There no definitive line between right and wrong. There is no universal standard that separate right from wrong. It is relative to one’s own society, generation or time. Based on your own judgment and the way you see things with experience, the decision is formed. For example, you were born and raised with some standards such as religious ones. Wearing miniskirts is not accepted by your background, long nails are not accepted too. Miniskirts are accepted in other countries especially the western ones. You either adapt or perish. Standards are different from different contraries. b. Utilitarianism – Ethics of Utilitarianism is defined to be the ability to predict the consequences of any action. This theory helps to compare and make decisions that are predicted for similar solutions. This theory points out the best solution, thereby the advantage of this ethical theory. Simply makes the use of utilization. Example, consider the airline industry where it offers tickets to first-class or Business class and Economy class. Business-class passengers pay more and get more benefits based on the airline, compared to the economy class. The economy class is introduced to meet the financial burdens of the airline, which is based on the Utilitarian Ethics. Right and wrong fully depends on the outcomes or consequences of selecting one action over other actions. Simply, others interest over your interests even though it exceeds your scope of work. In our case, listening to your supervisor and proceed will result in making others happy and yourself unsatisfied, because in the near future when possibly DOE fine the factory, it will be your head on a spike. the right action is one that overall has good consequences, the wrong action is one that overall has bad consequences. Which it is divided into two: 1) Act-utilitarianism: The person act is right if it results in the best outcomes in that particular situation. The act is considered bad if the results are bad. It concentrates on individual actions more than rules. 2) Rule-utilitarianism: Defined one form of utilitarianism that states an action turn into a habit or right conforms that can rule and leads to the greatest good. An act is wrong if it
• 35. 26 crosses a rule. Mainly, focusing on the overall consequences of rules, rather than individual action. The two types of Utilitarian Ethics are Act and Rule. Rule Utilitarian is applied to benefit those people by applying the fairest methods possible, while the Act Utilitarian is applied to ethical problems to benefit most of the people. c. Virtue Ethics – Ethics of Virtue is defined as the ability to characterize a person for a given scenario. A person is decided to be ethical and professional, as long as the person has a good record of the character portrayed, living and practicing ethics, applying and demonstrating the same, when executing the duties. Moreover; it defined as one of the three major approaches in normative ethics. Emphasizes the virtues or moral character of singles, when engineer knows duties and rules that called deontology and knows there are consequences of action called consequentialism. It determines an ethical approach that follows a moral compass everyone has. It feels wrong then do not do it as simple as that. It tells the type of people that individuals must be like. Virtue ethics is often defined as moral distinction and goodness and emphasizes on virtues and morality. d. Duty Ethics – Ethics of Duty and Right are defined to apply for those people who are honest, execute their duties professionally and ethically, correctly and by the rights of codes of conduct. The person must not be corrupted and selfish. The rightness or wrongness of actions does not depend on their consequences but on whether they fulfill our duty (Kant, 1802). As long the task is done then nothing matters, despite you do the wrong action, but the task is achieved then you are fine. Seems like a wrong approach, but it is applicable for some cases. Everyone has duties and obligations toward others and it focuses on what people do, not with the consequences of their actions. Duty ethics is with following orders from the company and ignore DOE approval. An approach Kant’s explained that the situation is considered a duty if it could be destined for all people to do. What is good about everyone doing their duty? There are cracks in the system if the method is followed, sometimes self- act is needed to make decisions. Another approach by Ross tries to get around this problem by creating “prima facie duties”, which are duties that every rational, reflective person would accept.
• 36. 27 e. Right Ethics- There are rights that have positive and negative sides, human do mistakes and have right because no one is perfect. These rights can be natural or conventional that are out of hand. The rights are legal, social, or ethical principles of freedom or entitlement. Action is accepted if it concerns the human rights of everyone involved regardless of the consequences of such actions. Not all rights are granted if it violates others right. For example, playing loud music in the workplace is your right, but it violet others rights to work quietly. Table 2.7: Ethical Theories Acts are morally right when Sub-theory Ethical Theory Locke: Rights as entitlements that prevent other people from meddling in other's lives - these Liberty, or negative rights, place duties on other people not to interfere with one's life Melden: The capacity to show concern for others and to be accountable within a moral community. Locke & Melden Right Theories Leads to a happy life that comes from cardinal virtues like wisdom, courage, temperance, and justice. Aristotle & MacIntyre Virtue Theories Represent moral with people like showing respect for people who deserve this respect because they have inherent worth as human beings who have the capacity to make moral judgments and to act with good will. This capacity gives them "human dignity." Immanuel Kant Duty Theories Following the guidance like keep promises. Unless stronger moral considerations override Ross Duty Theories Focus on individual actions, rather than general rules. When producing the most good for the most people involved in the particular situation Act- utilitarianism Utilitarianism
• 37. 28 Discounting the pleasure of an individual when compare to a group and produce the most good for the most people. Rule- utilitarianism Utilitarianism When matter of culture, religion and taste are ok and supporting the legal concerns. Without tolerating the different ways that people choose to live. Simon Blackburn Utilitarianism
• 38. 29 CHAPTER 3 ETHICAL PROBLEM ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION 3.1 Introduction The scenarios given have relevancy but complicated at the same time when it comes to some codes. A lot of contradictions faced. The decision must be based on the least consequences. Analyzing BEM codes will provide a clearer image of deciding. BEM codes were found to justify situations like our scenarios. BEM codes and ethical theories based on the sections reviewed in the literature review. three examples were studied, violating safety measurements caused severe disastrous results. The situation will be highlighted from a different point of view to justify action. 3.2 Ethical Theories on the first case study (scenario) As an engineer in GT Palm Power Solutions Bhd (GTPPS), I am assigned to set up a factory in Semenyih Industrial Estate Malaysia. The factory is to process OIL Palm Empty Fruit Bunches (EFB) to convert it into Fuel Pellets (FP). Equipment contracted from UTS local supplier. Equipment includes a furnace that can hurt the environment. An approval from DOE is needed but it takes 3- 6 months. Flue gas stack or chimney cost RM550000 is needed to get that approval. From ethical theories, table 3.1 shows ethical theories act on the scenario. I have pressure since it took me so long to find a job and DOE and BEM can aid me to find a job later in the near future if some accident occurs.
• 39. 30 3.2.1 Ethical Problem Analysis based on Ethical theories Table3.1: Ethical Theories angle from the First scenario Ethical Theory Applied on Scenario Right Theory Morality as a human will stop you from ignoring DOE approval, because pollution can endanger public health. I have the right to not listen to managing director. Virtue Theories Fear nothing and proceed with installation for scheduled production. Wisely, get DOE approval to avoid consequences and if MD cross lines, then you have no violations. Duty Theories Good will means not harming your commitment to the company, but you have another commitment toward BEM, so approval from DOE is the right decision. Utilitarianism Act- Utilitarianism: individually, proceed with project and listen to MD, since it means that I get to keep my job and gain experience. Rule- Utilitarianism: rules are rules and DOE approval is a must. Relativism Legal concerns state that DOE is important and in a country like Malaysia, environment comes first. In Malaysia there are rules for whoever cut a tree. Six theories divided into two categories. You spend RM550000 and wait about 3-6 months to get DOE approval or you proceed with installations. Figure 3.1 displays the point of illustration: Figure 3.1: Ethical Theories point chart
• 40. 31 It is clearly seen that seeking approval from DOE has the majority in terms of ethical theories. Another moral compass is studying BEM codes and compare it into the scenario. 3.2.2 BEM Codes on the first case study The scenario compared with the Board of Engineering Malaysia has eight linked codes of conduct. Code 1.1 1.1 A Professional Engineer shall approve and sign only those engineering documents that he has prepared or are prepared under his direct supervision. He shall not sign on such documents unless, where necessary, he has made qualifications on errors and inaccuracies. The DOE approval is necessary on paperwork because doing rubbish work might come later in the near future and cause troubles. The inaccuracies fall into doing work without signing DOE papers that will result in money and time losses at that time but secure the work later. Been inexperience engineer gives no authority on high level to sign to progress the work, so the MD must sign the final decision, not me. Code 1.2 1.2 A Professional Engineer shall certify satisfactory completion of a piece of work only if he has control over the supervision of the construction or installation of that work, and only if he is satisfied that the construction or installation has fulfilled the requirements of the engineering design and specifications. Responding fast and not wasting time is encouraged. Time is money and if the project delay 3-6 months, then DOE path is not the MD concern. Communication should be valid between UTS and GTPPS, as an engineer you link between them in order to reach a new agreement that does not include DOE approval. Code 1.4 1.4 A Registered Engineer having knowledge of any violation of this code and Local Authorities regulations shall report thereon to appropriate professional bodies and, when relevant, also to public authorities and cooperate with the proper authorities in furnishing such information or assistance as may be required.
• 41. 32 From this code Ir. Jason must submit a report to them to appropriate professional bodies if there are any problems which may impact on the population, so the chemical west will effect on the environment and society and Ir. Jason must report for this issue. Code 1.5 1.5 When the professional advice of a Professional Engineer is overruled and amended contrary to his advice, the Professional Engineer shall, if the amendment may in his opinion give rise to situation that may endanger life and/or property, notify his employer or client and such other authority as may be appropriate and explain the consequences to be expected as a result of his advice being overruled and amended. Same as code 1.4, the situation does not lay in my expertise. It’s more into managing field than engineer. Being a consulting engineer needs experience and challenges will make me better engineer, so again going with instinct and get DOE approval. Code 2.2 2.2 A Professional Engineer shall not accept assignment and assume responsibility for coordination of an entire project and sign and stamp (P.E. stamp) the engineering documents for the entire project unless each technical segment of the project is signed and stamped personally by the qualified engineer who has prepared the respective segment of the project. Responsibility is huge. If anything goes wrong, the consequences are big according to environment. If MD fires you, then you still have clear record of doing your job right and you can sue company for mistreating and violating codes. Qualification is from MD, even though he/she gave permission to deal with the situation, so I will get DOE approval and MD cannot harm my case. Code 3.1 3.1 A Registered Engineer shall be objective and truthful in professional reports, statements and testimony. He shall include all relevant and pertinent information in such reports, statements, or testimony, which should bear the date indicating when it was current. Efficiency in completion of work should not be affected by external factors unless it is related to public health. Installment from UTS are needed but they are not willing to negotiate the delay from DOE, so no options left except terminating the contract, harming public health is a serious violation.
• 42. 33 Code 4.2 4.2 A Registered Engineer shall not accept compensation, financial or otherwise, from more than one party for services on the same project, or for services pertaining to the same project, unless the circumstances are fully disclosed and agreed to by all interested parties. Liability and responsibility are up to you, since it is granted from MD. Asking yourseld the right question, what are the priorities? The priorities are finishing the task, follow MD orders and satisfy all linked authorities, but it is impossible. Code 5.1 5.1 A Registered Engineer shall not falsify his qualifications or permit misrepresentation of his or his associates' qualifications. He shall not misrepresent or exaggerate his responsibility in or for the subject matter of prior assignments. Brochures or other presentations incident to the solicitation of employment shall not misrepresent pertinent facts concerning employers, employees, associates, joint venturers, or past accomplishments. In this code is nor allow for the professional engineer to gives his qualification to others and he or permit misrepresentation this is important to be consider also if you are looking for job and so on. Code 5.5 5.5A Registered Engineer shall not maliciously injure or attempt to maliciously injure whether directly or indirectly the professional reputation, prospect or business of another Engineer. In this code is not allow for the professional engineer hurt the society and environment directly or indirectly, he/ she must consider all the consequences and he/she must find any solution to solve the problems which may affect or injure the society and environment 3.2.3 Public Health Endangerment The gasses coming from burning in the furnace are harmful when released to air. The gasses like greenhouse gases, nitrogen dioxide and CO2 can cause severe damages to public health. The diseases and illness coming from the burning in the furnace are headache, dizziness, nausea, eye and throat irritation. With more minor effects like fatigue, breathing problems and pale skin.
• 43. 34 The list is long of the harmful aspects from the released gasses. The most dangerous disease from the gases is cancer especially lung cancer. DOE is important to clear your hands, the RM555000 is nothing compared to lawsuits the company might get from people getting sick from the gasses. 3.2.4 DOE Legal Requirements The presence in or introduction into the air of a substance which has harmful or poisonous effects HSE Consideration in long term. Harms like Carbon Monoxide (CO), Carbon Dioxide (CO2), Chlorofluorocarbon (CFC), Odor Toxic, metal radioactive waste and Dust/ particulates. It impacts human, animal, plants, material, global warming and acid rain. In exercise of the powers conferred by section 51 of the Environmental Quality Act, 1974, the Minister after consultation with the Council makes the following regulations: Environmental Quality (Clean Air) Regulations, 1978, [PRELIMINARY] Air impurities" includes smoke, soot, dust, ash (including flyash), cinders, grit, solid particles of any kind inclusive of particulates, gases, fumes, mist, odours and radioactive substance which are generated as a result of combustion of fuel and the like, or a result of the use of electricity as a heat source, or a result of synthesis, resolution or any other treatment and any other substance which may be designated by the Minister as those which are liable to affect adversely the human health or the living environment. Chimney” includes any structure, opening, vent, flue, conduit, outlet or any structure constructed or arranged from or through which air impurities may be emitted, and any reference to a chimney of or used in connection with any premises, includes a reference to a chimney which serves the whole or a part of the premises though structurally separate from such premises or building thereon. Existing facility means any facility already erected, installed, and in operation prior to the date on which these Regulations come into force; and includes facility already purchased, acquired or under construction on or prior to such date but does not include facility transferred or moved to a different premise, site or location for the purpose of erection, installation, operation or use after such date. For the purpose of this definition, the date of purchase or acquisition of the facility shall be the date of the first legal commitment made by the purchaser to buy the principal part, portion or element of the equipment from the vendor.
• 44. 35 New facility means any plant, equipment, installation in any trade, business, establishment, or premises and includes any plant, equipment, or installation purchased or acquired on or after the date on which these Regulations come into force and which generates, emits, disposes, or scatters air impurities into the atmosphere Fuel burning equipment means any furnace, boiler, fireplace, oven, retort, incinerator, internal combustion engine, vessel, or any other apparatus, device, mechanism, stack, chimney or structure used in connection with the burning of any combustible material. The regulation strongly forbidden buying equipment without the chimney, producing any kind of harmful particulates is a serious violation and cannot be accepted by law. New and existing facilities are subjected to stop air harms as soon as possible or they subjected to fines and closure by the law. [PENALTY AND FEES] - (1) Any person who emits or discharges waste in contravention of regulations 7, 11, 14, 15, 16, 21, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 34, and 35 without a license issued under section 22 (1) of the Act shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable to a fine not exceeding ten thousand ringgit or to a term of imprisonment not exceeding two years or to both and to a further fine not exceeding one thousand ringgit a day for every day that the offense is continued after a notice by the Director-General requiring him to cease the act specified therein has been served upon him. (2) An omission or neglect to comply with, and an act done or attempted to be done contrary to the provisions of these Regulations other than paragraph (1) shall be an offense and the offender shall on conviction be liable to a fine not exceeding five thousand ringgit or to a term of imprisonment not exceeding one year or to both. The penalty is RM 10000 and a warning letter with a continuous inspection. If the premises do not fix the problem and install a chimney, the facility closes and get fined heavily. Conviction is serious that lead to prison if the premises insists on violations. One year is given to fix the issue.
• 45. 36 3.2.5 HSE Consideration The Complex is subject to a wide range of health, safety and environmental legislation. The safety legislation covers both "conventional" safety (slips, trips and falls etc.) and "process safety" with the HSE being the enforcing authority for all health and safety legislation at the Complex. "Process safety" legislation, such as the COMAH Regulations, is aimed specifically at those industries identified as having a major accident potential which could result in significant on-site and off-site effects to employees, members of the public and the wider environment. In terms of environmental legislation BP Grangemouth is subject to the Environmental Protection Act 1990 and various Integrated Pollution Control (IPC) Regulations made under this Act. SEPA is the enforcing authority for environmental legislation at the Complex. Role of the HSE is to enforce relevant health and safety statutory provisions. “Clean air is considered to be a basic requirement of human health and well- being. However, air pollution continues to pose a significant threat to health worldwide.” (WHO 2005). HSE support the decision of building Chimney and getting DOE approval. 3.2.6 Approaches can be taken a) Go with installments and avoid DOE approval. MD is the highest rank responsible and I listen to him/her no matter what. b) Try to renegotiate with UTS to help with DOE approval despite their reputation. It is less likely they respond, but throwing some extra cash might work to get DOE approval and install equipment or help to reduce the price of the chimney with least period of getting DOE approval which is 3 months. c) Install the chimney with RM550000 and wait 3-6 months for DOE approval. d) Try to find another competitor who’s willing to help in the situation, unlike UTS. e) Convince MD to get DOE approval otherwise I QUIT, which will put a bad image in the company later on when they get sued. f) Ethical Problems Techniques The five solutions vary in their impacts from positive to negative. Line drawing technique would favor solution and set the most righteous path.
• 46. 37 Figure 3.2: Line Drawing Analysis In figure 3.2, solution 3, which is getting DOE approval is the most suitable solution. Solution 5 by quitting is the worst because it will set a black past in my CV and finding another job will be hard. The middle solutions are a new solution that can be found by making efforts toward the conflicting sides. FOR SECOND CASE STUDY 3.3 Ethical Theories on the Second Scenario In this chapter, there are four questions that evaluate and will help us to identify the legal action that has been done by Either Ir. Alan or Ir. Dennis or the EC developer’s organization itself. Besides that, the codes that they breached going to be discussed in details regarding the given situations. The four research questions given to analysis and identify the ethical problem are as follow: ▪ Ir. Alan’s professional responsibilities in this situation. ▪ Ir. Dennis’s responsibilities to EC Developer. ▪ EC Developer’s responsibilities in this situation. ▪ How you would respond to this situation. 3.3.1 Ethical Problem Analysis based on Ethical theories: Table3.2: Ethical Theories angle from the Second scenario Relativism Based on the Relativism theory, there is no universal rule or standards or regulations to say that this is correct and acceptable or this is not a correct and wrong way of doing the things. Hence, by applying this theory, Ir Alan can refuse to sign for the building materials which are inferior in quality and workmanship, which is ethical as per the professional code
• 47. 38 of conducts and as per the BEM codes of professional conduct. This ensures the safety of the building and becomes legal decision making. Further, by applying this theory, Ir Alan can just continue working without bothering the contractor’s usage of inferior building materials at the construction site and as suggested by Ir Dennis to ignore as long as problems at the site are not encountered. Utilitarianism Based on this theory, one must adhere to the standards or processes or rules that are implemented in the interest of public welfare. Hence, as per this theory, Ir Alan must not sign for the building materials when it is of low quality and when the workmanship is not up to the standards. This will as per the standards and regulations to be followed by a certified professional engineer. Ir Alan must make Ir Dennis to realize that it is unethical if not adhered to the rules and regulations in maintaining the quality control. This decision is correct as per this theory as it benefits most of the people. Moreover, the Act of Utilitarianism theory can be applied by Ir Alan, whereby the act of going unnoticed on the poor-quality work done by the contractor cannot be made as it only benefits the contractor and Ir Dennis. Ir Dennis gets benefitted and hence asks Ir Alan not to bother. This is against the act of Utilitarianism. Duty Ethics and Right Ethics: By the theory of the Duty Ethics, a certified professional engineer must be honest and fair while executing his/her duties. The act of executing the duties must be in the welfare of the public and people’s interest. According to this assignment, Ir Alan is an honest person which ethics, as he brings to the notice of the Quality department engineer Ir Dennis, that the contractor is using poor quality of building material, which might danger the building to be a disaster or causality. By the BEM codes of professional engineer and conduct, Ir Alan is ready to report to the EC developers, considering the safety of the building, legal and social aspect. But Ir Dennis being another professional engineer doesn’t carry out his duty correctly, truly and sincerely as per the BEM professional codes of conduct. He must not keep silent when he knows that the contractor is using poor quality of the building material and when the workmanship is poor. Ir Dennis must either warn the contractor for using poor quality or
• 48. 39 must change the contractor or must report to the EC developers to take final actions against this. But Ir Dennis has failed from following is ethical and professional duties which must be followed in serving the society. By the theory of Right ethics, every engineer has the right perform his/ her duty sincerely, has the right to liberty, life and property. It is human’s fundamental right being me and followed. According to this theory, Ir Alan can overrule Ir Dennis’ decision to avoid any disaster and casualty in future. By doing this, safety. Legal and societal issues are addressed by Ir Alan. Hence, this theory is perfectly applicable to the given scenario of this assignment. Virtue Ethics By applying the theory of Virtue ethics, certified professional engineers must have good character by virtue and should exhibit good qualities at work morally. Ir Alan, by virtue, has good qualities morally professionally as he is worried about the poor quality being used at the construction site which might lead to a disaster and causalities. But Ir Dennis asks Ir Alan to ignore the contractor’s poor quality process although notified by Ir Alan. In this case, Ir Dennis doesn’t have the professionalism and is not true, honest and moral to the society and BEM. Ir Dennis fails to keep up his ethical duties as a certified professional engineer. 3.3.2 Ethical Problem Analysis based on BEM codes: The following are the BEM codes of professional conduct to be adhered by any certified professional engineer, where the assignment based ethical problems are highlighted with all possible solutions. The solutions provided are based on the facts, codes of conduct and ethical theories. This is based on the scenario given in the assignment. Code 1.1 1.1 A Professional Engineer shall approve and sign only those engineering documents that he has prepared or are prepared under his direct supervision. He shall not sign on such documents unless, where necessary, he has made qualifications on errors and inaccuracies.
• 49. 40 The DOE approval is necessary on paperwork because doing rubbish work might come later in the near future and cause troubles. The inaccuracies fall into doing work without signing DOE papers that will result in money and time losses at that time but secure the work later. Been inexperience engineer gives no authority on high level to sign to progress the work, so the MD must sign the final decision, not me. Code 1.2 1.2 A Professional Engineer shall certify satisfactory completion of a piece of work only if he has control over the supervision of the construction or installation of that work, and only if he is satisfied that the construction or installation has fulfilled the requirements of the engineering design and specifications. Responding fast and not wasting time is encouraged. Time is money and if the project delay 3-6 months, then DOE path is not the MD concern. Communication should be valid between UTS and GTPPS, as an engineer you link between them in order to reach a new agreement that does not include DOE approval. Code 1.3 1.3 A Registered Engineer shall not reveal facts, data or information without the prior consent of the client or employer except as authorized or required by law or when the withholding of such information is contrary to the safety of the public. base on this codes Ir. Jason must get all the information and document from the Ir. Daniel and he must check all the document and make sure the there no effect on the society and environment Code 1.4 1.4 A Registered Engineer having knowledge of any violation of this code and Local Authorities regulations shall report thereon to appropriate professional bodies and, when relevant, also to public authorities and cooperate with the proper authorities in furnishing such information or assistance as may be required. From this code Ir. Jason must submit a report to them to appropriate professional bodies if there are any problems which may impact on the population, so the chemical west will affect on the environment and society and Ir. Jason must report for this issue.
• 50. 41 Code 1.5 1.5 When the professional advice of a Professional Engineer is overruled and amended contrary to his advice, the Professional Engineer shall, if the amendment may in his opinion give rise to situation that may endanger life and/or property, notify his employer or client and such other authority as may be appropriate and explain the consequences to be expected as a result of his advice being overruled and amended. Same as code 1.4, the situation does not lay in my expertise. It’s more into managing field than engineer. Being a consulting engineer needs experience and challenges will make me better engineer, so again going with instinct and get DOE approval. Code 2.2 2.2 A Professional Engineer shall not accept assignment and assume responsibility for coordination of an entire project and sign and stamp (P.E. stamp) the engineering documents for the entire project unless each technical segment of the project is signed and stamped personally by the qualified engineer who has prepared the respective segment of the project. Responsibility is huge. If anything goes wrong, the consequences are big according to environment. If MD fires you, then you still have clear record of doing your job right and you can sue company for mistreating and violating codes. Qualification is from MD, even though he/she gave permission to deal with the situation, so I will get DOE approval and MD cannot harm my case. Code 3.1 3.1 A Registered Engineer shall be objective and truthful in professional reports, statements and testimony. He shall include all relevant and pertinent information in such reports, statements, or testimony, which should bear the date indicating when it was current. Efficiency in completion of work should not be affected by external factors unless it is related to public health. Installment from UTS are needed but they are not willing to negotiate the delay from DOE, so no options left except terminating the contract, harming public health is a serious violation. Code 4.2 4.2 A Registered Engineer shall not accept compensation, financial or otherwise, from more than one party for services on the same project, or for
• 51. 42 services pertaining to the same project, unless the circumstances are fully disclosed and agreed to by all interested parties. Liability and responsibility are up to you, since it is granted from MD. Asking yourself the right question, what are the priorities? The priorities are finishing the task, follow MD orders and satisfy all linked authorities, but it is impossible. Code 5.1 5.1 A Registered Engineer shall not falsify his qualifications or permit misrepresentation of his or his associates' qualifications. He shall not misrepresent or exaggerate his responsibility in or for the subject matter of prior assignments. Brochures or other presentations incident to the solicitation of employment shall not misrepresent pertinent facts concerning employers, employees, associates, joint venturers, or past accomplishments. In this code is nor allow for the professional engineer to gives his qualification to others and he or permit misrepresentation this is important to be consider also if you are looking for job and so on. Code 5.5 5.5 A Registered Engineer shall not maliciously injure or attempt to maliciously injure whether directly or indirectly the professional reputation, prospect or business of another Engineer. In this code is not allow for the professional engineer hurt the society and environment directly or indirectly, he/ she must consider all the consequences and he/she must find any solution to solve the problems which may affect or injure the society and environment 3.3.3 All Possible Solutions: EC developers hires Ir Alan to check and signoff the materials at the construction site used for the development of buildings, based on ethical, social, health, legal and cultural aspects of professional codes of conduct. Ir Alan is a Certified Professional Engineer and reports to Ir Dennis, who is the Quality Department Engineer at the EC Developers. But Ir Alan soon discovers that the contractor has used inferior materials in the buildings in order to save cost. Further, the overall standard of the workmanship is below the standard expectations at the construction site. But the
• 52. 43 contractor is still keep going on his work with poor quality of control process at the construction site. Ir Alan tried to complaint to Ir Dennis many times, but Ir Dennis doesn’t bother on this, as there are no problems encountered so far at the construction site. Ir Alan is worried about the low quality of building materials used at the construction site which might become a disaster or casualty if not solved at the correct time. Ir Alan is in a dilemma whether to resign or to find another job or to continue working here without any care. The following are the all possible solutions considering the BEM codes of professional conduct: 1. Ir Alan must not sign off the materials when the quality of the material is poor in order to save cost. 2. Ir Alan must give warning to the contractor not to compromise on the poor quality of building materials and workmanship. 3. Ir Alan must discuss with Ir Dennis and the contractor to highlight the ethical issues considering the building safety and disaster in case of failure against the quality control process. 4. Ir Alan can bring to the notice of EC developers when Ir Dennis is not listening to him. 5. Finally, Ir Alan must inform the BEM on this unethical issue and must seek their intervention to avoid disaster and casualties in future. 3.3.4 Line Drawing Analysis Line drawing is one of the most prominent ethical based problem identification and solution technique that can be applied to the given scenario of this assignment, although there are many techniques. This technique uses the concepts to identify the problems on a scale that ranges from 1 to 10, classifying whether the problems are easy or difficult to handle, acceptable or unacceptable. The scaling is arranged on a horizontal straight line. Problem identification is concluded if the scale is most acceptable on the straight horizontal line. In such a case, it will need a solution for the problem identified. BEM professional code of conduct will be referred to have all possible solutions to be provided by Ir Alan.
• 53. 44 Figure 3.3: Line drawing analysis for second scenario 1. Ir Alan takes immediate legal action complaining against Ir Dennis and the contractor to the relevant authorities, before it is being too late. 2. Ir Alan to alert the EC developers regarding the poor building material used and poor workmanship provided by contractor and ignorance of Ir Dennis. 3. Ir Alan compliant about his supervisor to the BEM. 4. Ir Alan tries to change the contractor’s unethical activity. 5. Ir Alan proposes to change the contractor and the Quality development officer. 6. Ir Alan is warned of being terminated if he doesn’t allow the contractor to proceed. 7. Ir Dennis removes Ir Alan from his position in the company. 8. Ir Alan resigns from the EC developers and looks for another job. 9. Ir Alan recommends new contractor to use good building materials considering the safety, cost and reliability of the buildings. 10. EC developers replaces Ir Dennis and the contractor. 11. Ir Alan doesn’t care about the safety issues and reliability in the construction site. 12. Ir Alan makes Ir Dennis what he is doing is unethical and changes him to adhere to the professional codes of conduct. FOR THIRD CASE STUDY 3.4 Ethical Theories on the third case study (scenario given) Analyzing the scenario and discuss the various possible solutions and in end come up with one solution for the problem. after which using the BEM codes and ethical theories it comes up with the answer to the issues provided above, from which the final solution would be deducted. So, after defining the issue/facts/concept, The BEM guidelines was defined for codes of professional conduct applicable to the given scenario, after which using the BEM codes and ethical theories, we come up with the answer to the issues provided above, from which the final solution would be deducted.
• 54. 45 3.4.1 Ethical Problem Analysis based on Ethical theories Table3.3: Ethical Theories angle from the Last scenario Ethical Theory Applied on Scenario Right Theory Morality as a human will stop you from ignoring DOE approval, because pollution can endanger public health. I have the right to not listen to managing director. Virtue Theories Fear nothing and proceed with installation for scheduled production. Wisely, get DOE approval to avoid consequences and if MD cross lines, then you have no violations. Duty Theories Good will means not harming your commitment to the company, but you have another commitment toward BEM, so approval from DOE is the right decision. Utilitarianism Act- Utilitarianism: individually, proceed with project and listen to MD, since it means that I get to keep my job and gain experience. Rule- Utilitarianism: rules are rules and DOE approval is a must. Relativism Legal concerns state that DOE is important and in a country like Malaysia, environment comes first. In Malaysia there are rules for whoever cut a tree. 3.4.2 Ethical Problem Analysis based on BEM codes (scenario given) The following are the BEM Guidelines for Codes of Professional Conduct which are applicable for the third case study (scenario given) Code 1.0 1.0: A Registered Engineer shall at all-time hold paramount the safety, health and welfare of the public. Code 1.1 1.1 A Professional Engineer shall approve and sign only those engineering documents that he has prepared or are prepared under his direct supervision. He shall not sign on such documents unless, where necessary, he has made qualifications on errors and inaccuracies. The DOE approval is necessary on paperwork because doing rubbish work might come later in the near future and cause troubles. The inaccuracies fall into doing work without signing DOE papers that will result in money and time losses at that time but secure the work later. Been inexperience engineer gives no
• 55. 46 authority on high level to sign to progress the work, so the MD must sign the final decision, not me. Code 1.2 1.2 A Professional Engineer shall certify satisfactory completion of a piece of work only if he has control over the supervision of the construction or installation of that work, and only if he is satisfied that the construction or installation has fulfilled the requirements of the engineering design and specifications. Responding fast and not wasting time is encouraged. Time is money and if the project delay 3-6 months, then DOE path is not the MD concern. Communication should be valid between UTS and GTPPS, as an engineer you link between them in order to reach a new agreement that does not include DOE approval. Code 1.3 1.3 A Registered Engineer shall not reveal facts, data or information without the prior consent of the client or employer except as authorized or required by law or when the withholding of such information is contrary to the safety of the public. Based on this codes Ir. Jason must get all the information and document from the Ir. Daniel and he must check all the document and make sure the there is no effect on the cecity and environment Code 1.4 1.4 A Registered Engineer having knowledge of any violation of this code and Local Authorities regulations shall report thereon to appropriate professional bodies and, when relevant, also to public authorities and cooperate with the proper authorities in furnishing such information or assistance as may be required. From this code Ir. Jason must submit a report to them to appropriate professional bodies if there are any problems which may impact on the population, so the chemical west will affect on the environment and society and Ir. Jason must report for this issue. Code 1.5 1.5 When the professional advice of a Professional Engineer is overruled and amended contrary to his advice, the Professional Engineer shall, if the amendment may in his opinion give rise to situation that may endanger life and/or
• 56. 47 property, notify his employer or client and such other authority as may be appropriate and explain the consequences to be expected as a result of his advice being overruled and amended. Same as code 1.4, the situation does not lay in my expertise. It’s more into managing field than engineer. Being a consulting engineer needs experience and challenges will make me better engineer, so again going with instinct and get DOE approval. Code 2.0 2.0 A Registered Engineer shall undertake assignments only if he is qualified by education and experience in the specific technical fields in which he is involved. Code 2.2 2.2 A Professional Engineer shall not accept assignment and assume responsibility for coordination of an entire project and sign and stamp (P.E. stamp) the engineering documents for the entire project unless each technical segment of the project is signed and stamped personally by the qualified engineer who has prepared the respective segment of the project. Responsibility is huge. If anything goes wrong, the consequences are big according to environment. If MD fires you, then you still have clear record of doing your job right and you can sue company for mistreating and violating codes. Qualification is from MD, even though he/she gave permission to deal with the situation, so I will get DOE approval and MD cannot harm my case. Code 3.0 3.0 A Registered Engineer shall issue public statements only in an objective and truthful manner. Code 3.1 3.1 A Registered Engineer shall be objective and truthful in professional reports, statements and testimony. He shall include all relevant and pertinent information in such reports, statements, or testimony, which should bear the date indicating when it was current. Efficiency in completion of work should not be affected by external factors unless it is related to public health. Installment from UTS are needed but they are not willing to negotiate the delay from DOE, so no options left except terminating the contract, harming public health is a serious violation.
• 57. 48 Code 4.0 4.0 A Registered Engineer shall act for each employer or clients as faithful agent or trustee. Code 4.2 4.2 A Registered Engineer shall not accept compensation, financial or otherwise, from more than one party for services on the same project, or for services pertaining to the same project, unless the circumstances are fully disclosed and agreed to by all interested parties. Liability and responsibility are up to you, since it is granted from MD. Asking yourseld the right question, what are the priorities? The priorities are finishing the task, follow MD orders and satisfy all linked authorities, but it is impossible. Code 5.0 5.0 A Registered Engineer shall conduct himself honourably, responsibly, ethically and lawfully so as to enhance the honour, reputation and usefulness of the profession. Code 5.1 5.1 A Registered Engineer shall not falsify his qualifications or permit misrepresentation of his or his associates' qualifications. He shall not misrepresent or exaggerate his responsibility in or for the subject matter of prior assignments. Brochures or other presentations incident to the solicitation of employment shall not misrepresent pertinent facts concerning employers, employees, associates, joint venturers, or past accomplishments. In this code is nor allow for the professional engineer to gives his qualification to others and he or permit misrepresentation this is important to be consider also if you are looking for job and so on. Code 5.5 5.5 A Registered Engineer shall not maliciously injure or attempt to maliciously injure whether directly or indirectly the professional reputation, prospect or business of another Engineer. In this code is not allow for the professional engineer hurt the society and environment directly or indirectly, he/ she must consider all the consequences and he/she must find any solution to solve the problems which may affect or injure the society and environment 5.5: A Registered Engineer shall not maliciously injure
• 58. 49 or attempt to maliciously injure whether directly or indirectly the professional reputation, prospect or business of another Engineer. Now using the BEM's Code of Ethics, Ethical Theories and Hypothetical situations we will try to answer the moral issues/facts and come up with various possible solutions by analyzing the scenario from different angles. The solutions which lead up to an ethical solution in the end will be defined below. Here is some of the relevant information obtained from answering the issues defined in introduction: As, the department of environment is a very prestigious and known body, to follow its requirement is very important as, plus it has very stringent norms. So, it becomes necessary to treat the chemical wastes properly before releasing or dispose it in the river. Hence, it's the duty of Ir. Jason’s- in charge to report the problem. Need to check the volume of the leakage, need to come up with data to analyze if the leakage is major or minor. Need the data, so that if Ir. Jason’s plans to complain, he has enough data to back him. Plus, to know, if the leaked volume of chemical wastes without treatment would create any problems to the river ecological system and the local community. Ir. Jason’s has got the data which tells him, that the leakage into the river is enough to cause deficiency of oxygen to fishes in the region (where chemical wastes is being released from the treatment plant), if the leakage isn't rectified at earliest possible the fishes in the area would start dying very soon. The leakage is enough to cause harm to the local community, as fish is the main part of their diet, if they die, the local community will start starving, plus the river water is used by the local community (poor) for drinking and bathing purposes. 3.4.3 All Possible Solutions: Now after getting the relevant information, the options for solution according to BEM's codes and ethical theories in front of engineer are as following: 1) Ir. Jason’s has moral obligation, to abide by BEM's code of professional conduct. Therefore, He has to inform the DOE or any other concerned authority regarding

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

Chapter 5 – Case Studies

Texas a&m university case studies collection.

https://ethics.tamu.edu/nsf-report/

The more than 30 cases address a wide range of ethical issues that can arise in engineering practice. There is no easy way to categorize the cases. So they are presented in alphabetical order by case name. There are some broad categories in terms of which many of the cases can be arranged. However, it should be noted that many cases fall into several of these categories; and many cases raise issues for which no special category is listed below. It is best for readers to view the listings below simply as suggestive.

TEACHING ENGINEERING ETHICS: A CASE STUDY APPROACH

Michael S. Pritchard

The Engineering Accreditation Commission of the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (EAC/ABET) now requires accredited engineering programs in the United States to make serious efforts to foster in their students “an understanding of the ethical characteristics of the engineering profession and practice.”2 In cooperation with the College of Engineering and Applied Sciences, Western Michigan University’s Center for the Study of Ethics in Society undertook a three year project to develop case studies that can be used in meeting this EAC/ABET requirement. This project is one of several funded by the National Science Foundation’s Ethics and Values in Science program in order to improve ethics education in engineering. What follows is an introduction to the project–its background and rationale, and guidelines for its use.

https://ethics.tamu.edu/case-studies/

NASA and the Kennedy Space Centre Space Shuttle Case Study Collection

https://www.nasa.gov/offices/education/centers/kennedy/technology/scsc.html

Welcome to NASA KSC’s newest educational resource – the Shuttle Case Study Collection! In an effort to capture and share knowledge gained from the Space Shuttle Program’s 30-year history, the KSC Education Programs and University Research Division has developed the Shuttle Case Study Collection, or SCSC. Designed especially for educators and students to gain behind the scenes access into the Space Shuttle System, the SCSC is a great resource for engineering and pre-engineering curriculum. This collection is designed to provide unique content for educators to incorporate into the classroom and aid in the teaching of good engineering practices and the enhancement of critical thinking, decision making, and problem-solving skills.

Our formally reviewed collection contains cases in a variety of technical areas related to the Space Shuttle System. Our reports are perfect tools for classroom discussion, group activities, and research projects. Supply your students with real world experiences of NASA engineers, contractors, and other industry professionals. Enhance your engineering curriculum by introducing students to the unique decision making processes related to Shuttle maintenance, processing, and launch. Challenge your students to think like official NASA team members. We invite you to browse our collection now!

Engineers without Borders

One of the best places to find case studies is from Engineers Without Borders.

Case studies are the basis of assignments and projects that connect people to Africa. They give students a sense of the issues people are facing in Africa and around the world.

http://my2.ewb.ca/library/collection/41/case-studies/

To the extent possible under law, Jennifer Kirkey has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to Engineering and Technology in Society - Canada , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Engineering, Social Justice, and Sustainable Community Development: Summary of a Workshop (2010)

Chapter: 3 session ii: engineering, ethics, and society, 3 session ii: engineering, ethics, and society.

The purpose of this session was to explore interfaces between engineering, ethics, and practice in circumstances of conflict, poverty, or emergency:

Do humanities and social sciences disciplines bear on problems for engineers and engineering professions in such circumstances? Has the field of engineering ethics drawn adequately from this scholarship or the real exigencies of engineering practice? Presenters were asked to “examine technical, political, historical, environmental, economic, and cultural constraints that shape outcomes.”

David Crocker, Institute for Philosophy and Public Policy, University of Maryland, College Park, moderated the session. The presenters were Ronald Kline, professor, Science and Technology Studies, Cornell University; Carl Mitcham, professor, Department of Philosophy, Colorado School of Mines; and Wesley Shrum, professor, Department of Sociology, Louisiana State University. Discussants were Priscilla Nelson, provost and vice president for academic affairs, New Jersey Institute of Technology, and Donna Riley, professor, Picker Engineering Program, Smith College.

3.1 INTEGRATING MACRO-ETHICS AND MICRO-ETHICS

Ron Kline, Cornell University, kicked off the session with a talk on the use of case studies to teach engineering ethics and suggestions for how general social concerns about technology (often called “macroethics”) can be integrated into the agent-centered approach (“microethics”). He noted that the purpose of using case studies is to place students in decision-making roles that resemble those faced on the job.

Case studies can have many different characteristics, he said. They may be historical or hypothetical, provide positive or negative role models, provide a focus on everyday or rare events, or on individual or organizational actions. They may require prospective or retrospective analysis, describe problems of conflicting values or “where to draw the line,” be very sketchy or very intensively described, or focus on an issue of professional conduct or of technology and society. But very often they reduce complexity to an individual choice rather than requiring an analysis of “interactions between individual actions and organizational responsibilities,” including public policy. He noted that in the workplace engineers do the research on a case themselves and write their own case studies, of a sort, in the process of making decisions. Thus he suggested that engineering students might learn more by creating their own case studies as they may have to do eventually in their jobs.

He acknowledged that many case studies could be used to highlight issues of collective responsibility in major social systems, which necessarily include scientific and technological components, such as the classic case of the investigation into the crash of a DC-10 in Paris in 1974. Cases illustrating the involvement of international corporations, unions, airports, and government agencies would lead to more exploring of such issues, but most cases have been boiled down to individual decisions. An integrated approach that includes macro-ethics would also have examined actions of and interactions between engineering professional societies, legislative and executive government agencies, and corporations and unions, including designated engineering representatives nominated by manufacturers and trained by the Federal Aviation Administration.

Dr. Kline suggested that investigations of engineering design cases involving environmental issues naturally include widespread social concerns. He is currently looking into using the Lake Source Cooling Project at Cornell University (an environmentally friendly redesign of Cornell’s chilled water system, eliminating refrigeration and its associated energy use) as a teaching example.

3.2 HUMANITARIAN ENGINEERING

Carl Mitcham, Department of Philosophy, Colorado School of Mines, began by noting that involvement of the humanities and social sciences in engineering ethics and practice has been attenuated, partly, he believes, because those disciplines do not yet have a significant body

of scholarship bridging theories and outcomes from which engineering can draw, though they do have things to contribute. Historically, he said, engineering as a profession has been influenced more by external rather than internal values. In 1828, English railway engineer and writer Thomas Tredgold said, “Engineering is the art of directing the great sources of power in nature for the use and convenience of man.” Today, the emphasis has changed from “use and convenience” to “public safety, health, and welfare,” but these are the definitions of non-engineers, he said.

Humanitarian engineering involves critical reflection on public safety, health, and welfare, and so engineering and humanitarianism have parallel histories and parallel interests. Their joint history can be traced back from nursing and the Red Cross in the mid-1800s, to engineering relief work during World War I, the many international institutions during World War II that have since incorporated engineering activities, and individual engineers with distinguished records of humanitarian work. A reflection of this progression is the establishment of Engineers Without Borders in the 1990s. In academia, Dr. Mitcham noted, courses in humanitarian engineering and engineering and sustainable community development were taught on his own campus and elsewhere.

Dr. Mitcham ended his presentation with challenges to engineers:

Engineering practice makes assumptions about the beneficence of engineering that deserve critical examination—to which the humanitarian movement can contribute.

Engineers can make crucial contributions to humanitarian relief efforts—especially if they are self-critical about what it means to be an engineer.

The humanitarian engineering possibility may be able to help address the pipeline problems.

Humanitarian engineering is simply one of many efforts to broaden and transform engineering.

He ended with a quote from The Engineer of 2020: Visions of Engineering in the New Century (National Academy of Engineering, 2004) 1 : “We aspire to a future where engineers are prepared to adapt to changes in global forces and trends and to ethically assist the world in creating a balance in the standards of living for developing and developed countries alike.”

3.3 REAL-WORLD ETHICAL DEBATES

Wesley Shrum, Louisiana State University, began by acknowledging that scholars in science and technology studies (STS) have been reluctant to engage in ethical debates except in hypothetical contexts. He paid tribute to the commitment of engineers to examining and analyzing the infrastructure failures during Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans, even as the rebuilding began. Five major teams, funded by a variety of sources, were actively involved, some collecting data and some reviewing records of the events.

Dr. Shrum himself was a member of a team, but he resigned to pursue his work in sociology from a more neutral position. His research— analyses of interviews with the engineers involved on the panels—is expected to take 10 years. He pointed out that the teams have become mired in controversy and accusations, for instance, of cover-ups or malfeasance; that teams have merged and separated; and that suspicions and tensions, charges and countercharges have arisen. In addition, each group has struggled to agree on what to say, when to say it, and to whom and by whom it should be said. These are the kinds of questions, he said, that STS should be addressing and that STS scholars should assist practitioners to address.

On another level, accusations of malfeasance against one team resulted in the establishment of a committee by the American Society of Civil Engineers to address issues related to the process, funding, communication to the public, and conflicts of interest related to engineering reviews. As secretary of the Society for Social Studies of Science (4S), Dr. Shrum believes that these issues too should be addressed by STS scholars. For example, 4S should take positions based on the results of research by its scholars on who should be members of technical committees and on when and how and what they should communicate to

the public; 4S should also address conflicts of interest on engineering review committees.

3.4 PANEL DISCUSSIONS

Priscilla Nelson, New Jersey Institute of Technology, drew on her own work in rapid-response engineering and on the development of linkages between the National Science Foundation Directorate for Engineering and the Directorate on Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences . She argued that integrating engineering and social sciences is critical to the future of engineering. The profession must have the ethical right to learn from disasters and other rare but anticipated events, she said. With that ability, the engineering profession could move from a data-poor state to a data-rich state. It could plan for postmortems and develop the data resources necessary to validate simulations that are now limited to hypothetical and speculative results that are open to challenge. She argued that case-based learning should be integrated throughout the engineering curriculum to ensure that young engineers are sensitive to the problems entailed in mega-scale projects. She said students should be recruited with the expectation of becoming practitioners of “a profession of integrated solutions.”

Dr. Shrum interjected that risk is central to the future of engineering, which means that the role of insurance and cultural perceptions must also be integrated into engineering education.

The other discussant, Donna Riley of Smith College, addressed essential prerequisites for engineers working toward social justice. As an engineering educator, she said that students would have to let go of their “absolute faith in engineering analysis as objective truth” and pay much more attention to context. In a challenge to the audience, she asked that everyone consider whether sociologist Robert Zussman was correct in his belief that engineers were taught not to question the motives or incentives of others, but to accept them and proceed to calculate the means of achieving them. If this is so, Zussman concluded, engineering is not a profession.

Dr. Riley argued that for engineers to be professionals, and to be considered as such, they must exercise individual autonomy and collective responsibility in working for social justice. She acknowledged, however, that exercising that responsibility would be difficult because engineers are not autonomous. Instead, she said, they are in “social captivity” insofar as they work in non-executive capacities for large corporate or government institutions. For the work of engineers to advance social justice, she said, they must be aware of the particular circumstances of each project, including the historical context, negative impacts of globalization, racism, classism, and sexism.

3.5 GENERAL DISCUSSION

Jonathan Herz, an architect in the U.S. General Services Administration, opened the discussion by restating that engineers have a responsibility for defining problems when environmental or human stakes are high and correcting the negative unintended consequences of past engineering mistakes. Aarne Vesilind, retired professor of civil engineering, Bucknell University, pointed out that “real life” requires engineers to extract significant information from obscure situations. However, he said, engineering students are not accustomed to, and sometimes even resent, being presented with problems that simulate such contexts. Providing information of varying degrees of relevance might improve engineers’ ability to identify or extract important or missing information in engineering analyses.

NAE member Alice Agogino and Dr. Riley then mentioned the role of feminist scholars who have raised questions about traditional power hierarchies, even in classrooms. Engineering students are not taught to consider that who poses a question (usually the more powerful party) may shape that question in a way that predisposes the answer to be most acceptable or helpful to the questioner. Feminist approaches to pedagogy bring these questions out into the open. Even the power of the teacher in the classroom has been questioned from this perspective. Dr. Nelson then suggested that power and setting agendas for engineering research, education, and practice might also be addressed in continuing professional education.

Dr. Shrum’s decision to leave the Katrina study team was questioned by a participant. He responded that his expertise is in documenting the underlying social and organizational conditions of conflicts and their role in engineering ethics, rather than in answering engineering ques-

tions. In addition, he had concluded that his effectiveness depended on his research subjects being confident of his neutrality.

CEES-AG member Caroline Whitbeck, retired professor in ethics, Case Western Reserve University, and founder of the Online Ethics Center, took issue with the argument that engineers are less self-directed than physicians. In response, Dr. Mitcham argued that, although he knew this idea was contentious, he thought everyone would agree that a good deal could be learned from the humanitarian tradition that would improve the engineering profession and engineering ethics.

This page intentionally left blank.

Engineering, Social Justice, and Sustainable Community Development is the first in a series of biennial workshops on the theme of engineering ethics and engineering leadership. This workshop addresses conflicting positive goals for engineering projects in impoverished areas and areas in crisis. These conflicts arise domestically as well as in international arenas. The goals of project sponsors and participants, which are often implicit, include protecting human welfare, ensuring social justice, and striving for environmental sustainability alongside the more often explicit goal of economic development or progress.

The workshop, summarized in this volume, discussed how to achieve the following:

• Improve research in engineering ethics.
• Improve engineering practice in situations of crisis and conflict.
• Improve engineering education in ethics and social issues.
• Involve professional societies in these efforts.

Welcome to OpenBook!

You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

Show this book's table of contents , where you can jump to any chapter by name.

...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

Switch between the Original Pages , where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter .

Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

View our suggested citation for this chapter.

Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

Get Email Updates

Do you enjoy reading reports from the Academies online for free ? Sign up for email notifications and we'll let you know about new publications in your areas of interest when they're released.