Case Repository

2022

Review of Other Engineer’s Work
Case #22-3 Synthesized
Questions:

Is Engineer C’s answering of the City Administrator’s questions and his criticism of Engineer B ethical?

Conclusions:

In answering the City Administrator’s specific questions and by criticizing the work of Engineer B, Engineer C’s action were unethical.

Independence of Peer Reviewer
Case #22-8 Synthesized
Questions:
  1. Is Engineer B ethically required to make certain that Engineer A is advised of the planned peer review?
  2. Is Engineer A ethically required to cooperate with the peer review of Engineer B?
Conclusions:
  1. Engineer B is ethically required to make certain that Engineer A is advised of the planned peer review. It is not necessary for Engineer B to provide that notice personally, but Engineer B must know either that Engineer A has been advised or that Engineer A has been terminated from the project.
  2. Owner and Engineer B are not required to obtain Engineer A’s consent to the peer review, merely to assure that Engineer A has been informed of the peer review. Especially in the face of known design defects in the first tower, Engineer A may not ethically object to the peer review.