Public health, safety, and welfare I
The engineering profession carries with it a profound responsibility to society. Unlike many occupations where the consequences of poor judgment may be limited in scope, engineering decisions can affect the lives, health, and safety of thousands or even millions of people. A bridge that fails, a chemical plant that leaks, a medical device that malfunctions, or software that controls critical infrastructure—all represent situations where engineering competence and ethical judgment are essential to public welfare.
This section examines the ethical considerations that guide engineers in their professional practice, with particular emphasis on obligations to society, clients, employers, suppliers, and fellow engineers. We will explore the hierarchy of ethical priorities, discuss specific guidelines for professional conduct, and analyze real-world scenarios that illustrate the application of ethical principles.
Ethical priorities in engineering
The challenge of conflicting demands
Engineers frequently face conflicting demands in their professional lives. An employer may pressure an engineer to cut costs in ways that compromise safety. A client may request a design that violates building codes. A project deadline may tempt an engineer to skip important verification steps. In each case, the engineer must navigate competing interests and make decisions that balance multiple considerations.
While it is impossible to use a single decision-making process to solve every ethical dilemma, it is clear that ethical considerations will force engineers to subjugate their own self-interests. The engineering profession has established a clear hierarchy of priorities to guide decision-making when conflicts arise.
Hierarchy of ethical obligations
The ethics of engineers dealing with others need to be considered in the following order from highest to lowest priority:
- Society and the public
- The law
- The engineering profession
- The engineer’s client
- The engineer’s firm
- Other involved engineers
- The engineer personally
This hierarchy makes clear that when conflicts arise, the engineer’s personal interests must yield to the interests of others, and ultimately, the welfare of society takes precedence over all other considerations.
The Primacy of public welfare
The placement of “society and the public” at the top of this hierarchy is not arbitrary. It reflects the fundamental purpose of engineering registration and licensure: to protect the public. This protection encompasses both protection from harm due to professional conduct and protection from harm due to incompetence.
Critical principle: No individual or organization may legitimately direct a registered engineer to harm the public. An employer cannot order an engineer to approve an unsafe design. A client cannot demand that an engineer falsify test results. When such demands are made, the engineer’s obligation to the public takes precedence.
Obligations to clients and employers
Overview of client relationships
The relationship between an engineer and a client (or employer) is one of trust and professional responsibility. The client relies on the engineer’s expertise, judgment, and integrity. In return, the engineer has obligations that extend beyond the mere terms of a contract.
The most common ethical guidelines affecting engineers’ interactions with their employer or client can be organized into several categories: competence, client protection, confidentiality, conflict avoidance, and honest communication.
Competence and limitations
Accepting appropriate assignments: Engineers should not accept assignments for which they do not have the skill, knowledge, or time to complete. Taking on work beyond one’s capabilities is not only unethical but potentially dangerous to the public.
Recognizing limitations: Engineers must recognize their own limitations. They should use associates and other experts when the design requirements exceed their abilities. There is no shame in acknowledging the boundaries of one’s expertise; indeed, such acknowledgment is a mark of professional maturity.
Continuous learning: The rapid pace of technological change means that engineers must continually update their knowledge and skills. What was state-of-the-art a decade ago may be obsolete today, and engineers have an obligation to remain current in their fields.
Protecting client interests
Scope of protection: The client’s interests must be protected. The extent of this protection exceeds normal business relationships and transcends the legal requirements of the engineer-client contract. Engineers are expected to act as trusted advisors, not merely as service providers.
Limits of client direction: Engineers must not be bound by what the client wants in instances where such desires would be unsuccessful, dishonest, unethical, unhealthy, or unsafe. The engineer’s professional judgment must prevail when client requests conflict with sound engineering practice or ethical principles.
Explaining consequences: If the client rejects the engineer’s recommendations, the engineer should fully explain the consequences to the client. This ensures that the client makes an informed decision and understands the risks involved.
Confidentiality
Protecting confidential information: Confidential client information remains the property of the client and must be kept confidential. This obligation continues even after the professional relationship ends.
Scope of confidentiality: Confidential information may include:
- Proprietary designs and processes
- Business strategies and plans
- Financial information
- Trade secrets
- Personal information about individuals
Exceptions: Confidentiality obligations may be overridden when public safety is at stake or when disclosure is required by law.
Conflicts of interest
Avoiding conflicts: Engineers must avoid conflicts of interest and should inform the client of any business connections or interests that might influence their judgment. Transparency is essential to maintaining trust.
Appearance of conflict: Engineers should also avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest when such an appearance would be detrimental to the profession, their client, or themselves. Even if no actual conflict exists, the perception of conflict can undermine confidence in the engineer’s judgment.
Single source of compensation: The engineer’s sole source of income for a particular project should be the fee paid by their client. Engineers should not accept compensation in any form from more than one party for the same services. This prevents divided loyalties and ensures that the engineer’s advice is not influenced by hidden financial interests.
Honesty and transparency
Admitting errors: Engineers must freely and openly admit to the client any errors made. Attempting to conceal errors is not only unethical but can lead to far greater harm if the error goes uncorrected.
Professional standards vs. perfection: All courts of law have required an engineer to perform in a manner consistent with normal professional standards. This is not the same as saying an engineer’s work must be error-free. If an engineer completes a design, has the design and calculations checked by another competent engineer, and an error is subsequently shown to have been made, the engineer may be held responsible but will probably not be considered negligent.
The distinction between responsibility and negligence is important. Engineers are responsible for their work, but negligence requires a failure to meet the standard of care expected of a competent professional.
Obligations to suppliers
The engineer-supplier relationship
Engineers routinely deal with manufacturers, contractors, and vendors (collectively referred to as suppliers). In this relationship, engineers have great responsibility and influence. They often specify products, approve materials, and make decisions that significantly affect suppliers’ businesses.
Such a relationship requires that engineers deal justly with both clients and suppliers. The engineer serves as an intermediary, and fairness to all parties is essential.
Maintaining ethical relationships
Long-term relationships: An engineer will often have an interest in maintaining good relationships with suppliers since this often leads to future work. Suppliers who have worked successfully with an engineer in the past may recommend that engineer to other clients.
Ethical boundaries: Nevertheless, relationships with suppliers must remain highly ethical. Suppliers should not be encouraged to feel that they have any special favors coming to them because of a long-standing relationship with the engineer. Each project must be evaluated on its merits, and suppliers must compete fairly.
Gifts and compensation
Prohibition on gifts: The engineer must not accept or solicit gifts or other valuable considerations from a supplier during, prior to, or after any job. This prohibition is absolute and applies regardless of the size or nature of the gift.
Indirect compensation: An engineer should not accept discounts, allowances, commissions, or any other indirect compensation from suppliers, contractors, or other engineers in connection with any work or recommendations. Such arrangements create conflicts of interest and undermine the engineer’s objectivity.
Fair enforcement of contracts
Enforcing specifications: The engineer must enforce the plans and specifications (i.e., the contract documents) but must also interpret the contract documents fairly. Rigid enforcement without regard to fairness can be as harmful as lax enforcement.
Complete specifications: Plans and specifications developed by the engineer on behalf of the client must be complete, definite, and specific. Ambiguous or incomplete specifications create disputes and can lead to substandard work.
Reasonable demands: Suppliers should not be required to spend time or furnish materials that are not called for in the plans and contract documents. Demanding work beyond the scope of the contract is unfair to suppliers.
Timely performance: The engineer should not unduly delay the performance of suppliers. Delays can cause significant financial harm to suppliers and may ultimately increase costs for the client.
Obligations to other engineers
Protecting the profession
Engineers should try to protect the engineering profession as a whole, to strengthen it, and to enhance its public stature. The reputation of the profession affects all engineers, and individual actions can either enhance or diminish public trust.
Professional reputation
Avoiding malicious injury: An engineer should not attempt to maliciously injure the professional reputation, business practice, or employment position of another engineer. Competition should be based on merit, not on tearing down competitors.
Reporting unethical behavior: However, if there is proof that another engineer has acted unethically or illegally, the engineer should advise the proper authority. This is not malicious injury but rather a professional obligation to maintain standards.
Balancing obligations: There is a tension between protecting colleagues and protecting the public. When an engineer becomes aware of unethical or illegal behavior by another engineer, the obligation to the public takes precedence.
Reviewing others’ work
Notification requirement: An engineer should not review someone else’s work while the other engineer is still employed unless the other engineer is made aware of the review. This courtesy allows the original engineer to explain their work and prevents misunderstandings.
Exceptions: This guideline may not apply when public safety is at immediate risk or when the review is part of a formal quality assurance process.
Employment ethics
Not replacing employed engineers: An engineer should not try to replace another engineer once the other engineer has received employment. Attempting to undercut a colleague who has already been hired is unprofessional.
Fair competition: An engineer should not use the advantages of a salaried position to compete unfairly (i.e., moonlight) with other engineers who have to charge more for the same consulting services. Salaried engineers have lower overhead costs, and using this advantage to undercut independent consultants is unfair.
Sharing knowledge
Disseminating information: Subject to legal and proprietary restraints, an engineer should freely report, publish, and distribute information that would be useful to other engineers. The advancement of the profession depends on the sharing of knowledge.
Limitations: This obligation is subject to confidentiality agreements, intellectual property rights, and other legal constraints. Engineers must balance the desire to share knowledge with their obligations to clients and employers.