CE 401 Civil Engineering Seminar Testing Water and Ethics ...jrchee0/CE 401/Power Point Files/Session... · •What do you do when your boss does not ... and Ethics – Case Study-Application

CE 401 Civil Engineering Seminar Testing Water ... and Ethics

•Quiz 6- 5 Questions-10 minutes max. •Quiz 5: 2-10, 8.2; 2-10, 8.4 •Review of Gilbane Gold(Continuation From Last Week) •What do you do when your boss does not want you to tell the truth? •Testing Water ... and Ethics – Case Study-Application of Josephson’s GKC Model •Essay Due in 2 weeks


REVIEW OF GILBANE GOLD David Jackson’s Situation: •Ask Questions First, and Then Engineer Indicted & ASFE on Gilbane Gold •Believed Z-Corps’ waste could poison the slude

•No one else at Z-Corp Agreed with David •Z-Corp had broken no laws •David stopped with Diane Collins, VP


REVIEW OF GILBANE GOLD

David Jackson’s Situation:

•There were other engineers involved •At least 2 Z-Corp employees •A Private Consultant •A Professor •The City Engineers




•David faced a decision •Duty of Loyalty/Confidentiality v Responsibility for public health/safety •An ethical dilemma




•David had options: •Go along with Z-Corp and dilute effluent •Document the basis for his concern by getting an outside supporting opinion •Blow the Whistle (Not ethical per De George) •Quietly resign and move on to new job


REVIEW OF GILBANE GOLD David Jackson’s Situation: •Resignation and Dilution Options–

•Some say not viable to leave or follow orders •Is that the standard you want applied to you? •Are the only viable options to convince his superiors to change or blow the whistle even though

•David is not essential to find a solution and •The current regulations are a product of a public policy debate entered by City with all concerned groups?



David Jackson’s Situation: •Resignation and Dilution Options–

•Z-Corp’s current permit was based on public policy and issued after the City Considered the interests and well being of all the stakeholders to arrive at this public policy •There is No evidence Z-Corps’ discharge is hurting the sludge •Z-Corp is complying with the regulations, and changing the regulations (public policy) is the City’s responsibility •City can begin a new rule making process if it wants •Z-Corp can continue to comply or move to less stringent location if the City stiffens the rules




•Resignation and Dilution Options– •City Can stop selling sludge if dangerous •City’s political judgment reflected in the current regulations/permit requirements •If dangerous to sludge, harm not immediate



David Jackson’s Situation: •David believes Z-Corp is harming sludge

•However, damage to sludge is at least debatable because objective People do disagree on this issue

•Who can be objective on this question? •Diane, Phil, Frank, and Tom Richards Probably Not! •Professor Massin disagrees-Is he objective? Probably Is!

•Would David’s situation differ if damage to the sludge is not debatable, e.g. Everyone agrees with his point of view?

•Was Robert Williams’ belief about the trusses remotely debatable?


REVIEW OF GILBANE GOLD This case raises central questions for all of us: • What do you do when your boss

wants you to lie?

• What do you do when your boss wants you to do what you believe is wrong?



What do you do when your boss wants you to lie?







•Should the superior be culpable if his ordered action is unethical?







•Should the superior be culpable if his ordered action is unethical? He has position of authority and directs others how to act.



What do you do when your boss wants you to lie? •Should the superior be culpable if his ordered action is unethical? •Does the Boss’s culpability change if the subordinate follows the unethical orders?




•How should the subordinate respond?



What do you do when your boss wants you to lie? •How should the subordinate respond? •Should the subordinate be culpable if he follows orders he believes are wrong? •What if disinterested third parties conclude the action is clearly unethical, or ethically debatable? •Does the duty of loyalty affect this analysis?







• How should the subordinate respond? • At the very least, the subordinate must distinguish fact from opinion, and identify any factual basis for opinions.



What do you do when your boss wants you to lie? •How should the subordinate respond?

•Should the subordinate be culpable if he follows orders he believes are wrong?



What do you do when your boss wants you to lie? •How should the subordinate respond? •Should the subordinate be culpable if he follows orders he believes are wrong?

•What if disinterested third parties conclude the action is clearly unethical, or ethically debatable?




•Can you find guidance on this question in the Codes of Ethics?




•Can you find guidance on this question in the Codes of Ethics?

•Not to my knowledge. •Not in the Engineering Codes.



What do you do when your boss wants you to lie? How do you decide? •IF an unethical order is clearly unethical, both the superior and the subordinate are held accountable.

•Clearly Unethical means reasonable people will all agree •Both the Superior and Subordinate should have known


REVIEW OF GILBANE GOLD What do you do when your boss wants you to lie? How do you decide? •IF an unethical order is not clearly unethical, the superior is held accountable, but not the subordinate.

•Not Clearly Unethical means reasonable people will disagree •The Superior should have known, but Subordinate gets the benefit of doubt


TESTING WATER … AND ETHICS

A Young Engineer Confronts His First Professional Dilemma and Designs An Engineering Solution-Jim Duffy •Same Small Groups As Last Two Weeks



A Young Engineer Confronts His First Professional Dilemma and Designs An Engineering Solution-Jim Duffy •Does Jim Really Confront the ethical problem? •Who actually makes the decision?



Discuss Work Sheet I and the Following Questions •Who is the decision maker in this case •If there is an ethical dilemma, what is it •Who are the Stakeholders •What options are available



Who is the decision maker?



•Who is the decision maker? •Is It Jim Duffy?



•Who is the decision maker? •Is It Jim Duffy? Probably Not, but Jim Agrees with the decision made, right?



•Who is the decision maker? •Is It Jim Duffy? Probably Not, but Jim Agrees with the decision made, right? •Then Who Is Making this Decision?



•Who is the decision maker? •Is It Jim Duffy? Probably Not, but Jim Agrees with the decision made, right? •Then Who Is Making this Decision? Porter-Rodman management



•Is there is an ethical dilemma, and How is it defined?



•Is there is an ethical dilemma, and How is it defined?

•Yes, there is an ethical dilemma •Company’s promise keeping duty (contract) vs. Honesty in Reporting



•Who are the Stakeholders?



•Who are the Stakeholders? •Porter-Rodman



•Who are the Stakeholders? •Porter-Rodman •Jim Duffy



•Who are the Stakeholders? •Porter-Rodman •Jim Duffy •Anderson Properties/Ed Anderson/Client



•Who are the Stakeholders? •Porter-Rodman •Jim Duffy •Anderson Properties/Ed Anderson/Client •Prospective buyers of the property



•Who are the Stakeholders? •Porter-Rodman •Jim Duffy •Anderson Properties/Ed Anderson/Client •Prospective buyers of the property

•How is the Public Health, Safety, or Welfare affected in this case?



•What options are available



•What options are available •Back out of Contract-Breach Promise



•What options are available •Back out of Contract-Breach Promise •Send Anderson a Letter recommending full reporting of all wells-then go along



•What options are available •Back out of Contract-Breach Promise •Send Anderson a Letter recommending full reporting of all wells-then go along •Pay part of cost of more investigation if full reporting requires more work



•What options are available •Back out of Contract-Breach Promise •Send Anderson a Letter recommending full reporting of all wells-then go along •Pay part of cost of more investigation if full reporting requires more work •Partial Report per Contract



•Which Option is LEAST ethical? Why? •Back out of Contract-Breach Promise •Send Anderson a Letter recommending full reporting of all wells-then go along •Pay part of cost of more investigation if full reporting requires more work •Partial Report per Contract



•Which Option is MOST ethical? Why? •Back out of Contract-Breach Promise •Send Anderson a Letter recommending full reporting of all wells-then go along •Pay part of cost of more investigation if full reporting requires more work •Partial Report per Contract



•What would you do? Why? •Back out of Contract-Breach Promise •Send Anderson a Letter recommending full reporting of all wells-then go along •Pay part of cost of more investigation if full reporting requires more work •Partial Report per Contract



Discuss Work Sheet II and the Following Questions •How was this dilemma created?

•When? •By Whom?

•What rationalizations appeared in video



•How was this dilemma created? When?

•Dilemma created when Porter-Rodman agreed to a contract that required partial reporting instead of permitting full reporting



•What rationalizations appeared in video •Everybody Does It.



•What rationalizations appeared in video •Everybody Does It. •It Doesn’t Hurt Anyone.



•What rationalizations appeared in video •Everybody Does It. •It Doesn’t Hurt Anyone. •If it’s Legal, It’s Ethical.



•What rationalizations appeared in video •Everybody Does It. •It Doesn’t Hurt Anyone. •If it’s Legal, It’s Ethical. •If it’s Necessary, It’s Ethical.



•Duffy says only “Reasonable Sacrifice” is required by doing the “right thing”

•Do You Agree? Why?




•Do You Agree? Why? •Do You Think Josephson would Agree?




•Do You Agree? Why? •Do You Think Josephson would Agree? •Who determines what sacrifice is “Reasonable”?



•One engineer said, “Just Give The Client What He Wants”

•Do you agree that this is a proper duty?



•One engineer said, “Just Give The Client What He Wants”

•Do you agree that this is a proper duty? •When do other duties supersede this duty?



•Who are the intended beneficiaries of Porter-Rodman’s work for Ed Anderson?




•Ed Anderson/Anderson Properties




•Ed Anderson/Anderson Properties •What about prospective buyers?


CLOSING COMMENTS ON ETHICAL DECISIONS

•Reviewed the role of our Code of Ethics •Reviewed Ethical Theory •Applied Josephson’s EDM to Engineering dilemma •Information is introductory only to the ideas and tools available


CLOSING COMMENTS ON ETHICAL DECISIONS •Goal: For each person to make MORE ETHICAL DECISIONS, MORE OFTEN

•Requires an ethical commitment •Requires ethical humility •Before you act, ask yourself: What would I do if:

•My action will be tomorrow’s headline •My kid is watching over my shoulder


CLOSING COMMENTS ON ETHICAL DECISIONS •Goal: For each person to make MORE ETHICAL DECISIONS, MORE OFTEN

•Requires an ethical commitment •Requires ethical humility •Before you act, ask yourself: What would I do if:

•My action will be tomorrow’s headline •My kid is watching over my shoulder


CLOSING COMMENTS ON ETHICAL DECISIONS

•Goal: For each person to make MORE ETHICAL DECISIONS, MORE OFTEN

•All My Sons: About Being Better •Markers: Walking the Walk •Starfish: Making a difference one decision at a time, one person at a time.

Documents

CE 401 Civil Engineering Seminar Testing Water and Ethics ...jrchee0/CE 401/Power Point Files/Session... · •What do you do when your boss does not ... and Ethics – Case Study-Application