Obligation-Conflict Resolution
Case 92-4 (1992) · Public Welfare - Duty Of Government Engineer
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
Engineer A Pressure Yielding Abrogation Prohibition
prevails over
Engineer A Superior Expediting Directive Resistance
the two obligations are in tension (competesWith)
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Employment Pressure on Engineer A to Issue Non-Compliant Permit
Engineer A Disassociation from Professionally Compromising Situation
prevails over
Engineer A Regulatory Permit Refusal Non-Withdrawal
the two obligations are in tension (competesWith)
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Engineer A Permit Refusal with Disassociation Permissibility
Featured
Engineer A Media Coverage External Reporting Discharge
prevails over
Engineer A Public Employee Heightened Safety Responsibility
the two obligations are in tension (competesWith)
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Public Authorities Already Investigating the Permit Concern
Engineer A Regulatory Permit Environmental Law Compliance Refusal
prevails over
Engineer A Superior Expediting Directive Non-Subordination
the two obligations are in tension (competesWith)
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Superior Expedite Directive Suppressing Technical Review
Engineer A Employment Pressure Non-Subordination Public Safety
prevails over
Engineer A Employer Loyalty Bounded by Public Safety
the two obligations are in tension (competesWith)
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Engineer A Public Safety Permit Refusal State
- Public Safety Risk from SO2 Emissions Without Adequate Scrubbing
Engineer A License Board Consultation Self-Protection
prevails over
Engineer A Employer Loyalty Boundary Environmental Law
the two obligations are in tension (competesWith)
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Engineer A Employment Pressure to Issue Non-Compliant Permit
- Public Safety at Risk from Non-Compliant Permit
Engineer A Public Health Safety Whistleblowing Mandatory vs Personal Conscience Distinction
prevails over
BER 82-5 Defense Engineer Personal Conscience Whistleblowing Right
the two obligations are in tension (competesWith)
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Non-Safety Fund Waste Reporting Discretion (BER 82-5 Precedent)
Engineer A Regulatory Permit Environmental Law Compliance Refusal
prevails over
Engineer A Employer Loyalty Boundary Environmental Law
the two obligations are in tension (competesWith)
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
- Engineer A Employment Pressure to Issue Non-Compliant Permit
- Public Safety at Risk from Non-Compliant Permit
Open tensions recorded without a resolution:
Engineer A Employer Loyalty Bounded by Public Safety vs Engineer A Post-Department-Override Whistleblowing Permissibility
What the board concluded
- It would not have been ethical for Engineer A to withdraw from further work on the project.
- It would not have been ethical for Engineer A to issue the permit.
- It was ethical for Engineer A to refuse to issue the permit.