Transcript Engineering & Ethics

Ethics for the
Practicing Engineer—
Engineering
Responsibilities
SWEDE Conference
San Antonio
11 May 2007
Texas State Board Rules
 Continuing Education Program—Jan. 2004
 The 78th legislature passed SB277 mandating a CEP
program administered by State Board
 Based on self-determination of activities and content,
and accounting by the license holder
 Requires 15 PDH (professional development hours) to
include 1 PDH professional ethics, each year
 Carry-over of up to 15 PDH is allowed
 Required for renewal after March 2005
 http://www.tbpe.state.tx.us/downloads/131.139%20-%20Adopted.htm
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
2
“Responsible”
 Responsible:
 1) liable to be called on to answer; liable to
legal review or in case of fault to penalties;
 2) able to answer for one’s conduct and
obligations; able to choose for oneself
between right and wrong... (Webster’s Ninth
New Collegiate Dictionary)
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
3
One philosophy of
responsibility
 Cicero’s Creed: "Salus populi suprema est
lex," Marcus Tullius Cicero, 106 - 43 BC
 “The safety of the public shall be the[ir]
highest law" (Broome 1986)
 An early statement of the engineer’s
responsibility
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
4
The primary responsibility
of engineers…
The engineer is responsible for making
sure his work does not harm the public
health, safety or welfare (?)
The engineer is responsible for protecting
the public health, safety and welfare (?)
The engineer is responsible for protecting
the public health, safety and welfare, to
the extent that his work affects these (?)
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
5
Ways in which
harm can be caused
 Negligently--by failing to exercise due care
 Recklessly--acting in a way that we
recognize might cause harm
 Intentionally--not common for
professionals to cause harm by intent
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
6
Responsibilities
of engineers
 Legal responsibilities: Not to cause harm;
to compensate when harm is caused; to
practice in accord with Engineering
Practices Act
 Moral responsibilities: To recognize and discharge our duties while
satisfying our obligations to the public; understand and adhere to a
Code of Ethics
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
7
The Engineering Practices Act-a Code of Ethics for the Texas PE
 Engineers Shall Protect the Public
 Engineers Shall Be Objective and Truthful
 Engineers' Actions Shall Be Competent
 Engineers Shall Maintain Confidentiality of
Clients
 Engineers' Responsibility to the Profession
 Action in Another Jurisdiction
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
8
Engineers Shall Protect the
Public
 Shall be entrusted to protect the public
(anyone who might be affected)
 Shall not perform any function which
might endanger
 Shall notify parties or Board of any
practices which might endanger
 Should examine the environmental impact
of their actions and projects
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
9
Engineers Shall Be
Objective and Truthful
 Shall issue only objective and truthful
statements, and not mislead
 Disclose any possible conflict of interest
 Properly seal his/her work; modify other
engineers’ work only in prescribed
situations
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
10
Engineers' Actions Shall Be
Competent
 Shall practice only in their area of
competence, when qualified by education
and/or experience
 Shall not express an opinion in a legal
forum contrary to generally accepted
engineering practice without disclosing
basis and rationale for that opinion.
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
11
Engineers Shall Maintain
Confidentiality of Clients
 Shall act as faithful agents for clients or
employers
 Reveal confidences and private
information only when…
 consent is given,
 required by court order, or
 if undisclosed, the information constitutes a
threat to the public
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
12
Engineers' Responsibility to
the Profession
 Shall engage in professional and business
activities only in honest and ethical
manner
 Shall endeavor to meet all applicable
professional practice requirements,
statutes, regulations, laws, etc.
 Exercise reasonable care to prevent
conduct by associates or employees
contrary to the Act
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
13
Engineers' Responsibility to
the Profession, cont’d...
 Exercise reasonable care to prevent
association of your name, etc., with any
venture that might be fraudulent,
dishonest, or illegal…
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
14
Engineers' Responsibility to
the Profession, cont’d...
 Conduct affairs in a manner respectful of
the client, employees, involved parties…
 honest billing practices, do not perform
unnecessary work, avoid unprofessional
language, harassment, intimidation…
 do not aid or abet an unlicensed person in the
unlawful practice of engineering
 do not maliciously injure the reputation of
another or retaliate against someone who
gives an unfavorable reference in good faith
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
15
Engineers' Responsibility to
the Profession, cont’d...
 Conduct affairs in respectful manner,
cont’d...
 do not give or promise any gift, favor or commission
to secure work
 do not accept compensation from more than one
party for the same work
 do not solicit work with false or misleading advertising
 do not submit competitive bids (cost) to any state
governmental entity
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
16
Action in Another
Jurisdiction
 Do not practice or offer to practice
engineering in violation of any laws in
other jurisdictions
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
17
Some issues with the Texas
State Board...
 Industrial exemption--State Board has
stated an intention of terminating the
industrial exemption
 Who is bound by the Engineering
Practices Act?
 Professional Engineers
 Engineer employees?
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
18
Missouri City
Antenna Tower Collapse
 For more details, see:
 http://ethics.tamu.edu/ethics/tvtower/tv3.htm#analysis
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
19
Scenario
 Antenna & 1000 ft. tower designed by
engineer
 Contractor (rigger) awarded erection
contract
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
20
Tower erection method
Tower
(about
1000 ft)
Gin pole
Tower sections (40
ft)
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
Antenna Section
21
Scenario, cont’d...
 During erection, rigger realizes lifting
points on antenna sections can’t be used
without fouling antenna baskets
 Rigger asks to remove baskets and
replace them after erection
 Engineer denies riggers’ request (the last
contractor who removed baskets caused
expensive damage to antennas)
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
22
Scenario, cont’d...
 Rigger develops a plan to mount
extension on antenna section to lift it
 Rigger asks engineer to review the plan
 Engineer declines to review riggers’ plan
to mount extension on antenna, citing
increased liability
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
23
Antenna
lifting
method-riggers’
modification
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
24
Scenario, cont’d...
 Rigger proceeds with lift of antenna
 Extension boom fails, antenna falls
(striking stay cable?), tower falls, seven
workers are killed
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
25
Free body
diagram of
antenna
section
during lift,
with
rigger’s
extension
boom
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
26
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
27
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
28
Antenna section after collapse
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
29
Extension boom and failed u-bolts
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
30
Wreckage of antenna and crane
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
31
Some questions...
 Were the engineer’s actions the right
actions?
 No, seven workers died.
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
32
Some questions...
 What model of responsibility did the
engineer follow?
 Minimalist model?
 Reasonable care model?
 Good works model?
 Should the engineer’s moral
responsibility take precedence over his
legal responsibility?
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
33
Some questions...
 Was the engineer’s responsibility for
a safe and workable design met?
 ...with lifting lugs that could not be
used by the rigger?
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
34
Were the riggers morally
responsible for this accident?
 Did they recognize that the modification
they attempted required engineering skills
to accomplish?
 Could they be expected to know this?
 Did they ask an engineer for assistance?
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
35
What could the engineer
have done differently?
 Agree to review the riggers’ plans?
 Allowed riggers to remove antenna
baskets?
 Offer to design a better extension
boom?
 Decline to review the plans, but suggest
to the riggers that they should hire an
engineer to review their plans?
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
36
Don’t ignore your
moral responsibility
on the road of life
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
37
Three models of
professional responsibility
 Minimalist or Malpractice model
 Reasonable Care model
 Good Works or Supererogation model
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
38
Minimalist or Malpractice
model of responsibility:
 Engineers have a duty only to adhere to
accepted standards of practice, fulfill only
basic duties prescribed by terms of
employment.
 Those who would follow this model might
be most concerned with not doing
anything “wrong”.
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
39
Reasonable Care
model of responsibility:
 Adhere to accepted standards of practice, and...
 Take reasonable care to ensure that mistakes are
prevented and the public welfare is protected
 Exercise and apply skill, ability and judgement
reasonably and without neglect
 keep abreast of evolving changes in knowledge and
practice
 recognize when minimal standards of practice might not
be sufficient to prevent a harm, and take additional
actions to prevent such a harm in those cases
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
40
Characteristics of the
Reasonable Care model
 Concern for preventing harm, rather than
trying to prevent causing harm
 Oriented towards the future, toward avoiding
problems and protecting the public
 Attitude of concern or caring about public,
client, environment...
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
41
Good Works (Supererogation)
model of responsibility:
 “...above and beyond the call of duty.”
 Example: A consulting engineer offers to
design a parking lot for her church at her
cost, with no charge for her time.
 Example: Peter Palchinski, the Marxist mining
engineer who promoted improvements to
workers’ living conditions, and was executed
by Stalin.
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
42
Responsibilities
of engineers
 Legal responsibilities: Not to cause harm; to compensate when
harm is caused; to practice in accord with Engineering Practices Act
 Moral responsibilities: To recognize and
discharge our duties while satisfying our
obligations to the public; understand and
adhere to a Code of Ethics
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
43
A hypothetical scenario...
 Suppose an airline maintenance engineer
contacts an airframe manufacturer with a
question about a new maintenance
procedure that his crews have proposed,
indicating that his crews have experimented
with this procedure and have demonstrated
that it can significantly reduce maintenance
time and costs.
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
44
A hypothetical scenario
cont’d...
 The procedure in question involves the removal
of jet engine & pylon as a unit for replacement
of a spherical bearing which served to support
the engine/pylon.
 Manufacturer’s recommended procedure is to
remove the engine, then the pylon.
 Maintenance personnel wish to remove the
engine & pylon as a unit, supporting the engine
with an engine stand mounted on a forklift,
positioned at the cg of the engine/pylon unit.
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
45
Engine and pylon assy...
6 ft
11 May 2007
1,865 lb (pylon)
13,477 lb (pylon + engine)
Engineering Responsibilities
46
In pairs, discuss and answer
the following questions...
 How would the manufacturer respond if he
follows...
 minimalist model of responsibility?
 reasonable care model?
 good works model?
 What responsibilities do you think the airframe
manufacturer’s engineer has? How should
he/she respond to this request?
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
47
The case isn’t hypothetical...
 In 1979, improper servicing procedures during
maintenance of a American Airlines DC-10 caused
undetected fractures in the bulkhead supporting the
pylon.
 Eight weeks later on 25 May, during takeoff from
Chicago O’Hare, AA Flight 191 lost the No. 1 engine
from the left wing, severing hydraulic control and
power lines near that pylon, and causing loss of
control, crash, and 273 deaths.
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
48
DC-10 case, continued...
 American Airlines maintenance crews were
using forklifts to remove the DC-10 engines
for pylon mounting bearing replacement, a
shortcut that reduced service efforts by 200
man-hours per engine.
 McDonnell-Douglas (the manufacturer) knew
that AA and Continental were using this nonstandard procedure, and suspected that this
might increase the risk of airframe damage.
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
49
DC-10 case, continued...
References:
NTSB Report on the 1979 Chicago Crash
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20594, December 21,
1979
(found on web at...http://www.rvs.unibielefeld.de/publications/Incidents/DOCS/Co
mAndRep/OHare/NTSB/COPY/oharefull.html)
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
50
Where do professional
responsibilities lie?
 The reasonable care model is the best
model for engineers.
 Codes demand it (...accept responsibility in making
engineering decisions consistent with the safety, health and welfare of
the public, and to disclose promptly factors that might endanger the
public or the environment...IEEE Code of Ethics)
 Public expects it
 Principle of Proportional Care: Those who have
a greater ability to cause harm also have a
greater obligation to prevent harm.
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
51
Duty Ethics:
What is our “duty”?
 The distinction between these three
models of professional responsibility can
be clarified if we could agree on a
definition of our “duty”.
 “Do your duty in all things. You cannot do
more. You should never wish to do less.”
Robert E. Lee’s definition of duty is broad.
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
52
Kantian Duty Ethics
 Kant argues that duty ethics is based on
the fundamental duty to respect others
 This leads to more specific statements of
our duty, such as duty not to cause injury
or harm, duty to deal with other fairly,
etc.
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
53
Some impediments to
responsibility










Self-interest
Fear
Self-deception
Ignorance
Egocentric tendencies
Microscopic vision
Uncritical acceptance of authority
Antagonism toward outside regulation
“Groupthink”
Cumbersome business organizations
11 May 2007
Engineering Responsibilities
54