Engineer A did not fulfill her ethical obligations by informing the City Administrator and certain members of the city council of her concerns.

The engineer's 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. While easily stated in the abstract, 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, often 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. The Board has faced this most difficult issue on two other occasions in somewhat dissimilar circumstances. In Case 65-12, we dealt with a situation in which a group of engineers believed that certain machinery was unsafe, and we determined that the engineers were ethically justified in refusing to participate in the processing or production of the product in question. We recognized in that case that such action by the engineers would likely lead to the loss of employment. More recently, in Case 82-5, the engineer was employed by a large industrial company and after reviewing plans for materials supplied by a subcontractor, determined that they were inadequate both from a design and a cost stand point and therefore should be rejected. Thereafter, the engineer advised his superiors of the deficiencies but his recommendations were rejected. The engineer persisted with his recommendations and was placed on probation with the warning that if his job performance did not improve he w...

Engineer A is employed as the City Engineer/Director of Public Works for a medium sized city and is the only licensed professional engineer in a position of responsibility in the city government. The city has several large food processing plants that discharge very large amounts of vegetable wastes into the city's sanitary system during the canning season. Part of the canning season coincides with the rainy season.Engineer A has the responsibility for the disposal plant and beds and is directly responsible to City Administrator C. Technician B answers to Engineer A.During the course of her employment, Engineer A notifies Administrator C of the in adequate capacity of the plant and beds to handle the potential overflow during the rainy season and offers possible solutions. Engineer A has also discussed the problem privately with certain members of the city council without the permission of City Administrator C. City Administrator C has told Engineer A that "we will face the problem when it comes." City Administrator C orders Engineer A to discuss the problems only with him and warns her that her job is in danger if she disobeys.Engineer A again privately brings the problem up to other city officials. City Administrator C removes Engineer A from responsibility of the entire sanitary system and the chain of command by a letter instructing Technician B that he is to take responsible charge of the sanitary system and report directly to City Administrator C. Technician B asks for a clarification and is again instructed via memo by City Administrator C that he, Technician B, is completely responsible and is to report any interference by a third party to City Administrator C. Engineer A receives a copy of the memo. In addition, Engineer A is placed on probation and ordered not to discuss this matter further and that if she does she will be terminated.Engineer A continues in her capacity as City Engineer/Director of Public Works, assumes no responsibility for the disposal pl...

Did Engineer A fulfill her ethical obligation by informing City Administrator C and certain members of the city council of her concerns?