Obligation-Conflict Resolution
Case 82-5 (1982) · Whistleblowing
Professional obligations conflict, and the board applies no fixed rule for which one wins.
Each resolution is recorded as three edges:
competesWith (the tension),
prevailsOver (the obligation the board allowed to win in this case), and
defeasibleUnder (the situation under which the yielding obligation gives way).
The same tension is then traced across comparable cases, where its resolution shifts with context.
Hover any obligation or state to see its definition; click to open it in OntServe.
How this case resolved it
Featured
Defense Subcontractor Specification Compliance Reporting Engineer A Management Memoranda
prevails over
Faithful Agent Obligation Engineer A Subcontractor Review Role
the two obligations are in tension (competesWith)
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Faithful Agent Boundary — Engineer A Post-Management-Override
- Management Override of Engineer A's Subcontractor Rejection Recommendation
Defense Pressure Resistance Engineer A Probation Threat
prevails over
Management Business Decision Characterization Non-Excuse Large Industrial Defense Company Management
the two obligations are in tension (competesWith)
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Management Override of Engineer Technical Recommendation — Defense Procurement
Non-Safety Public Funds Whistleblowing Personal Conscience Right Engineer A
prevails over
Employment Loss Acceptance Mandatory Cost Public Safety Whistleblowing Engineer A Probation Threat
the two obligations are in tension (competesWith)
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Code-Mandated Withdrawal Threshold Unmet — No Safety Endangerment
- Non-Safety Public Fund Waste Concern — Defense Procurement
Ethics Code Welfare Scope Defense Expenditure Board Recognition
prevails over
Defense Expenditure Public Welfare Ethics Code Scope Recognition Engineer A Ethics Review
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Non-Safety Public Fund Waste Concern — Defense Procurement
Whistleblowing Personal Conscience Right Non-Mandatory Duty Recognition Engineer A Public Funds Concern
prevails over
Mandatory Withdrawal Threshold Non-Application Engineer A Defense Expenditure Case
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Code-Mandated Withdrawal Threshold Unmet — No Safety Endangerment
Open tensions recorded without a resolution:
Defense Pressure Resistance Engineer A Probation Threat vs Faithful Agent Obligation Engineer A Subcontractor Review Role
Defense Public Expenditure Non-Dismissal Board Recognition Engineer A Case vs Mandatory Withdrawal Threshold Non-Application Engineer A Defense Expenditure Case
Ethics Code Welfare Scope Defense Expenditure Board Recognition vs Mandatory Withdrawal Threshold Non-Application Engineer A Defense Expenditure Case
Faithful Agent Obligation Engineer A Subcontractor Review Role vs Non-Safety Public Funds Whistleblowing Personal Conscience Right Engineer A
Mandatory Withdrawal Threshold Non-Application Engineer A Defense Expenditure Case vs Non-Safety Public Funds Whistleblowing Personal Conscience Right Engineer A
Public Health Safety Whistleblowing Mandatory Duty Distinction Engineer A Defense Case vs Whistleblowing Personal Conscience Right Non-Mandatory Duty Recognition Engineer A Public Funds Concern
What the board concluded
- Engineer A does not have an ethical obligation to continue his effort to secure a change in the policy of his employer under these circumstances, or to report his concerns to proper authority, but has an ethical right to do so as a matter of personal conscience.
How comparable cases resolved the same tension
A faithful-agent duty yields to a public-protection obligation. The yielding obligation ("Faithful Agent") recurs across cases; the obligation that overrides it and the context under which it yields differ case by case. This is the case-law move: not a single rule, but a family of context-indexed resolutions.
| Case | Obligation that prevailed | Yielding obligation | Context (defeasibleUnder) |
|---|---|---|---|
|
24-01
Balancing Client Directives and Public...
|
Engineer L Client Override Regulatory Report | Engineer L Faithful Agent Boundary | Engineer L Confirmed Risk Without Safeguards; Engineer L Resource Constrained Client |
| Engineer L Client Budget Pressure Refusal | Engineer L Faithful Agent Boundary | Engineer L Confirmed Risk Without Safeguards; Engineer L Resource Constrained Client | |
|
20-4
Public Health, Safety, and...
|
Engineer B Post-Override Regulatory Reporting | Engineer B Faithful Agent Boundary | MWC Override of Engineers A and B |
| Engineer A Post-Override Regulatory Reporting | Engineer A Faithful Agent Boundary | MWC Override of Engineers A and B | |
|
95-5
Failure To Include Information In...
|
Engineer B Expert Witness Neutrality | Engineer B Faithful Agent Boundary | Engineer B Adversarial Engagement; Engineer B Client Defense Bias |
| Engineer B Complete Technical Reporting | Engineer B Faithful Agent Boundary | Engineer B Adversarial Engagement; Engineer B Client Defense Bias | |
|
04-8
Public Welfare—Client Action Following...
|
Engineer A Safety Obligation Wetland Fill | Engineer A Faithful Agent Limits Wetland | Engineer A Confirmed Environmental Risk; Engineer A Faithful Agent Duty Conflict |
| Engineer A Wetland Confidentiality Limits | Engineer A Faithful Agent Limits Wetland | Engineer A Confirmed Environmental Risk; Engineer A Faithful Agent Duty Conflict |