Engineering 1000 Chapter 8: Ethics

1
Engineering 1000Chapter 8 Ethics
2
Outline

• What are ethics and why are they important?
• Professional engineering codes of ethics
• Duties of the engineer
• Common ethical issues
• conflict of interest
• confidentiality
• whistleblowing
• moonlighting
• Product liability
• defects in products
• negligence
• risk
• warranties

3
What is/are Ethics?

• From Webster
• the discipline dealing with what is good and bad
  and with moral duty and obligation
• a set of moral principles or values
• a theory or system of moral values
• the principles of conduct governing an individual
  or a group (professional ethics)
• a guiding philosophy

4
Why is Ethical Behaviour Important?

• Imagine what would happen if there was no ethical
  behaviour
• technical short cuts taken
• safety compromised for profit
• corruption and bribery
• From the textbook
• During the early part of the nineteenth century,
  steam engineers were redesigned by people such as
  James Watt, Oliver Evans, and Richard Tevethick
  to become more portable and powerful. This work
  allowed such engines to be installed in mines,
  factories, trains, and steam boats.Unfortunately
  , an unexpected negative development soon
  appeared Steamboat owners were competing with
  one another for lucrative trade agreements by
  racing along the riverways. Safety valves were
  disabled to increase steam pressure, boilers were
  forced to operate beyond their capacities, and
  explosions would often occur as a result of these
  actions. Between 1816 and 1848, 2563 people were
  killed and 2097 injured in 233 such explosions
• Professional engineering references attest that
  these practices continue today

5
Westray Mine Explosion, Nova Scotia

• At 520am on 9 May 1992 the Westray coal mine
  exploded, killing 26 miners
• It is a story of incompetence, of mismanagement,
  of bureaucratic bungling, of deceit, of
  ruthlessness, of cover-up, of apathy, of
  expediency, and of cynical indifference
• Westray management, starting with the chief
  executive officer, was required by law, by good
  business practice, and by good conscience to
  design and operate the Westray mine safely.
  Westray management failed in this primary
  responsibility
• The Department of Labour through its mine
  inspectorate must bear a correlative
  responsibility for its continued failure in its
  duty to ensure compliance with the Coal Mines
  Regulation Act and the Occupational Health and
  Safety Act.
• With its "hands-off" attitude, its general
  indifference to the quality of mine planning, and
  its lassitude about any safety responsibility,
  the Department of Natural Resources failed to
  discharge its duties in a creditable manner.

From the report of the Official Enquiry
http//www.gov.ns.ca/labr/westray/contents.htm
6

• In professional terms, ethics can be summarised
  simplistically
• Do the right thing!
• Simple, right?

7
Example

• Kermit Vandivier had worked at B.F. Gooderich for
  five years, first in instrumentation and later as
  a data analyst and technical writer. In 1968 he
  was assigned to write a report on the performance
  of the Goodrich wheels and brakes commissioned by
  the Air Force for its new A7-D light attach
  aircraft. According to his account, he became
  aware of the designs limitations and of serious
  irregularities in the qualification tests. The
  brake failed to meet Air Force specifications.
  Upon pointing out the problems, however, he was
  given a direct order to stop complaining and to
  write a report that would show the brake
  qualified. He was led to believe that several
  layers of management were behind this demand and
  would accept whatever distortions might be needed
  because their engineering judgement assured them
  that the brake was acceptable.
• Vandivier then drafted a 200-page report with
  dozens of falsifications and misrepresentations.
  But, he refused to sign it. Later he gave as
  excuses for his complicity the facts that we was
  42 years old with a wife and six children. He had
  recently bought and felt financially unable to
  change jobs. He felt certain that he would have
  been fired if he had refused to participate in
  writing the report.
• From Ethics in Engineering, M. Martin and R.
  Schinzinger, McGraw Hill, 1996

8
But What is Right?

• The trouble with ethics is that determining what
  is really right, and for whom, is difficult
• if I complain, Ill lose my job and my family
  will suffer
• if I say something, Fred will lose his job
• what about my career?
• if the company loses money, there will be
  layoffs
• just this once my boss promised me a promotion
  if this product is on time
• The solutions to other peoples problems are
  always easy
• ethical behaviour is harder when it is personal

9
Shades of Grey

• Most people can distinguish the extremes of
  good and bad
• The difficulty comes in the grey areas, when
  something is only a little naughty
• no-one will ever know
• its OK to pirate this software because Bill has
  plenty of money already
• its OK to pirate this software because I
  wouldnt have bought it anyway
• he/she only gave me a small gift - it didnt
  affect my judgement
• I know what the data will look like, so why
  waste time and effort
• we only use a small amount of chemical, so we
  just dump it out the back when were done
• the product launch is next week its only
  unsafe in exceptional circumstances that will
  never happen
• Minor ethical breaches have the habit of being a
  slippery slope, leading to ever greater violations

10
Philosophical Roots of Ethics
Mills Utilitarianism (1806 - 1873) An action is morally correct if it produces the greatest benefit to the greatest number of people. A conflict of interest may arise when evaluating the benefits. It is important that a personal benefit be counted as equal to a similar benefit to someone else.
Kants Duty-Based Ethics (1724 - 1804) Each person has a duty to follow those courses of action that would be acceptable as universal principles (e.g. honesty, fairness) for everyone to follow Conflicts arise when following a universal principle may cause harm. e.g. telling a white lie in unacceptable even when the truth causes harm
Lockes Rights-Based Ethics (1632 - 1704) All persons are free and equal and each has a right to life, health, liberty, possessions, and the products of his/her labour It can be difficult to tell when one persons rights infringe on anothers.
Aristotles Virtue Ethics (384 - 322BC) Happiness is achieved by developing virtues or qualities of character through deduction and reason. An act is good if it is in accordance with reason. This usually means a course of action that is the golden mean between extremes of excess and deficiency The definition of virtue is vague.
Adapted from Canadian Professional Engineering
Practice and Ethics, G. Andrews and J. Kemper,
Harcourt 1999
11
Codes of Ethics

• Professional Engineers Ontario Code of Ethics
  from Regulation 77 of the Professional Engineers
  Act.
• 1. It is the duty of a practitioner to the
  public, to the practitioner's employer, to the
  practitioner's clients, to other members of the
  practitioner's profession, and to the
  practitioner to act at all times with,
• i.fairness and loyalty to the practitioner's
  associates, employers, clients, subordinates and
  employees,
• ii.fidelity to public needs,
• iii.devotion to high ideals of personal honour
  and professional integrity,
• iv.knowledge of developments in the area of
  professional engineering relevant to any services
  that are undertaken, and
• v.competence in the performance of any
  professional engineering services that are
  undertaken.
• The full text is available from
• http//www.peo.on.ca/EngPractice/code_of_ethics.ht
  ml

12
Duties of the Engineer

• The codes of ethics can be summarised as a series
  of duties
• Duty to society
• protect the average person from physical or
  financial harm
• Duty to employers and clients
• fairness and loyalty to employer
• conflict of interest
• Duty to colleagues
• courtesy and goodwill
• unethical to review the work of a colleague
  without their knowledge
• Duty to employees and subordinates
• Duty to the engineering profession
• maintain the dignity and prestige of the
  engineering profession
• Duty to oneself
• duty to others is balanced by the engineers own
  rights
• adequate payment, good work environment, etc.

13
The Engineers Creed

• As a Professional Engineer, I dedicate my
  professional knowledge and skill to the
  advancement and betterment of human welfare.
• I pledge
• To give the utmost of performance
• To participate in none but honest enterprise
• To live and work according to the laws of man and
  the highest standards of professional conduct
• To place service before profit, the honor and
  standing of the profession before personal
  advantage, and the public welfare above all other
  considerations.
• In humility and with need for Divine Guidance, I
  make this pledge.
• Adopted by National Society of Professional
  Engineers, June 1954

14
Common Ethical Issues

• We will cover a few of the more common ethical
  issues that may face an ordinary practising
  engineer
• conflict of interest
• confidentially
• whistleblowing
• moonlighting

15
Conflict of Interest

• Consider this example from US National Society of
  Professional Engineers (NSPE)
• Izzy A. Candid, P.E. was requested by client,
  Hope and Trusting (HT), to prepare
  specifications for a curtain wall system.
• Candid immediately makes HT aware that he is a
  minority shareholder in a curtain wall
  manufacturing company and that if HT agrees,
  Candid would be pleased to prepare a set of
  generic specifications for a curtain wall system.
  
• HT agrees but is silent on the point of having
  Candid's firm submit a proposal.
• Later, Candid provides HT with the names of
  three manufacturers that prepare curtain wall
  systems for bidding purposes. Candid includes the
  name of his firm among the three manufacturers,
  but does not include the full specifications and
  other supporting material about Candid's curtain
  wall manufacturing firm with the bidding material
  provided to the client.
• Candid's reasoning is that he could answer any
  questions that HT might have about the curtain
  wall manufacturing system in his company.
• After evaluating the proposals solicited through
  documentation prepared by Candid, and upon
  Candid's recommendation, HT selects Candid's
  company.
• Was it ethical for Candid to prepare bidding
  criteria, bid, evaluate bids, and recommend his
  company for owner selection?

16
Conflict of Interest

• Conflict of interest occurs when an engineer has
  an interest that interferes with his/her ability
  to make independent judgements
• e.g. owns shares in a potential supplier of
  products to the engineers client or employer
• Over the past few weeks, the opposition parties
  in the House of Commons have held the Prime
  Minister to account over the conflict of interest
  between his financial interest in the Grand-Mère
  Golf Club and his pressuring a Crown corporation
  for money for the next door Auberge Grand-Mère.
  We have been urging the Prime Minister to call an
  independent judicial inquiry to look into this
  and other related controversies known
  collectively as "Shawinigate".
  www.shawinigate.ca
• To resolve a conflict of interest, the engineer
  must fully inform the client/employer of the
  conflict as soon as it occurs
• the client/employer is then free to make an
  informed decision
• they can choose to ignore the conflict if they so
  wish

17
Example Confidentiality

• An aeronautical research engineer from Company A
  conducted tests of a new aircraft tail assembly
  configuration at his companys wind tunnel and
  knew that devastating vibrations could occur in
  the configuration under certain conditions,
  leading to destruction of the aircraft.
• Later, at a professional meeting, Company As
  engineer hears an engineer from Company B, a
  competitor, describe a tail assembly
  configuration for one of Company Bs new aircraft
  that runs the risk of producing the same
  destructive vibrations that Company As engineer
  found in his tests.
• Presumably, there is an obligation, as a matter
  of both ethics and law, to maintain company
  confidentiality regarding Company As proprietary
  knowledge.
• On the other hand, engineers have a duty to
  safeguard public safety and welfare. If the
  engineer from Company A remains silent, Company B
  might not discover the destructive vibrations
  until a fatal crash occurs, killing many people.
• What should the engineer from Company A do?

From Canadian Professional Engineering Practice
and Ethics, G. Andrews and J. Kemper, Harcourt
1999
18
Confidentiality

• The engineer has a clear ethical responsibility
  (under normal circumstances) to maintain the
  affairs of an employer or client confidential
• Potential issues
• consultants working for clients who are
  competitors
• failure of a client to follow environmental
  regulations (which the engineer is legally
  obliged to report)
• Non-disclosure agreements (NDA)
• are frequently required before a company
  discusses technical details with a consultant
• may identify what each party is bringing to the
  discussion (so-called background intellectual
  property), to avoid uncertainty later
• may specify what information is being disclosed
  for what purpose, and clauses governing the use
  of that information
• especially important for patenting an NDA
  indicates that the IP is not being publicly
  disclosed, which affects a subsequent patent
  claim

19
Whistleblowing

• Whistleblowers are people (usually employees
  who believe an organisation is engaged in unsafe,
  unethical or illegal practices and go public with
  their charge, having tried with no success to
  have the situation corrected through internal
  channels Quoted in Canadian Professional
  Engineering Practice and Ethics, G. Andrews and
  J. Kemper, Harcourt 1999
• A recent case
• Nancy Olivieri, at Torontos Hospital for Sick
  Children, became convinced that use of the drug
  deferiprone on children with thalassemia had
  dangerous side effects. The manufacturer of the
  drug, Apotex, that funded Olivieris study,
  cancelled her research and threatened her with a
  breach of contract suit should she inform her
  patients or publish her negative findings.
  www.aaas.org
• As with all complex issues, the truth depends
  on whom you talk with

20
One View

• In the fall of 1995, liver biopsies in some of
  the Toronto patients showed dangerous levels of
  iron overload throwing the researchers into a
  panic. Toxic levels can compromise liver function
  and lead to scarring and life-threatening
  cirrhosis.
• Dr. Olivieri immediately stopped giving the drug
  to those patients most at risk but, at the time,
  was convinced the study should continue in those
  in whom the drug appeared useful. The researchers
  thought the drug treatment could be appropriate
  for some of the patients. The only way to find
  out for sure was to keep the study on track and
  carefully monitor the patients.
• When Dr. Olivieri approached Apotex with her
  negative findings and a request to change the
  patient consent form to include the
  contraindications, the company disagreed that the
  patients were at risk. Apotex opposed changing
  the consent form.
• But when Dr. Olivieri went ahead anyway and
  drafted a new consent form, and forwarded it to
  Apotex in May, 1996, the company response was to
  fire her as principal investigator of the Toronto
  studies and as chair of the international study's
  steering committee. The study at the Hospital for
  Sick Children was halted, and Apotex confiscated
  the drugs from the hospital's pharmacy.
• Dr. Olivieri was also repeatedly threatened with
  legal action if she divulged the findings to her
  patients. She spoke out anyway, believing that
  the health care of her patients was paramount.
  Dr. Olivieri also believed she would be supported
  by the Hospital. But her request for legal
  assistance from the institution was denied on the
  grounds that she had not obtained the
  administration's approval for her deal with
  Apotex.
• This summer, three years after she first arranged
  funding from Apotex, and in spite of the
  manufacturer's claim that her study is seriously
  flawed, the New England Journal of Medicine has
  published Dr. Olivieri's results.

From Canadian Association of university Teachers
www.caut.ca
21
Another View

• Deferiprone once held promise for thousands of
  sick people, an effective treatment for
  Thalassemia. Now questions are being raised does
  the treatment do more harm than good? This is a
  story about a top Canadian doctor, the company
  that funded her research and a controversial
  editorial in a prestigious medical journal.
• It's been billed as a classic David and Goliath
  story one lonely doctor against a mighty
  pharmaceutical company. The combatants are Dr.
  Nancy Olivieri, a prominent Toronto researcher,
  and Apotex, a Canadian pharmaceutical company. At
  issue is the effectiveness and safety of the
  experimental drug.
• What made deferiprone so attractive was that it
  could be given in pill form instead of the daily
  12-hour injection of drug, is so cumbersome that
  many patients stop.
• Dr. Nancy Olivieri was an early proponent of
  deferiprone, but her research led her to suspect
  the drug was either ineffective or dangerous. She
  wanted to make her findings known, but there was
  a problem. She'd signed a contract giving Apotex
  control over all communications bout the
  research. Nonetheless, Dr. Olivieri defied Apotex
  and wrote an article, published on August 13 in
  the prestigious New England Journal Of Medicine.
  Five of 14 patients taking deferiprone showed
  evidence of liver damage.
• To Dr. Olivieri, having her study published meant
  long-sought vindication. But questions are being
  asked about her research. An editorial in the
  same issue of the journal raises some mportant
  concerns and finds her study inconclusive. The
  editorial pointed out that the study had a
  "limited number of patients," that some
  researchers would consider Olivieri's method of
  sampling the liver as "unacceptable." Their
  biggest objection was that the patients studied
  weren't comparable.
• The findings, wrote the editors, "weakened their
  conclusion." Dr. Marshall Kaplan, of Tufts New
  England Medical Centre, is one of the editorial's
  authors. "We basically were asking questions and
  to say how strong are the data, and I think we
  decided we couldn't come to a conclusion," Kaplan
  said
• For Dr. Jerome Kassirer the editor-in-chief of
  the "New England Journal Of Medicine," the study
  is intriguing, but hardly the last word. "It is
  some evidence -- I wouldn't be willing to
  describe it as weak, it is some evidence that
  adds to our current knowledge about the efficacy
  and perhaps even the toxicity of the drug,"
  Kassirer said Officials at Apotex have called the
  editorial a vindication of their position that
  deferiprone is safe. In the end, what looked like
  a battle between David and Goliath is turning
  into a scientific debate as to who's research you
  can trust.

http//www.tv.cbc.ca/
22
Moonlighting

• Moonlighting is the practice of performing
  part-time employment in addition to a regular job
• While it is not unethical to moonlight, the code
  of ethics states that the full-time employer must
  be fully informed and be allowed to judge whether
  the second job affects the performance of the
  primary employment
• in particular, the moonlighting should not
  compete with the primary employer
• neither should the employers facilities be used
  for the moolighting without prior approval
• Some companies require contracts that state that
  ideas etc related to the primary employer are
  company property
• whether or not they occur on company property or
  in company time
• If the engineer is offering engineering services
  to the public, he/she also requires the
  appropriate licenses under the Engineering Act
  (e.g. a Certificate of Authorisation)

23
Product Liability

• Product liability deals with what happens when a
  product fails
• It is related to ethics, since product failure
  can be the result of unethical behaviour
• Many products are required by law to conform to
  certain safety standards
• these are the result of cumulative experience
  with product failures
• e.g. the Canadian Standards Association
• The CSA describes a standard
• Many standards define safety requirements
  intended to reduce the risk of personal injury
  due to electrical shock or fire. Some standards
  set levels of performance for products, and
  increasingly standards address social concerns,
  such as how our environment is managed or how
  information about us is being used.
• Product liability is determined in a lawsuit
  between a plaintiff who is seeking to recover
  damages for personal injury or property loss from
  the seller or manufacturer (the defendant)

24
Defects in Products

• Manufacturing defects
• a serious but localised flaw, occurring in one or
  a few products out of the many produced
• Design defects
• a result of poor design or a design that does not
  meet appropriate standards
• design defects are global, and affect the entire
  product populations
• e.g. Bridgestone-Firestone tyre recall in 2000
• Bridgestone/Firestone Announces Voluntary Recall
  of 3.85 million RADIAL ATX and RADIAL ATX II
  Tires, and 2.7 million Wilderness AT Tires
  www.bridgestone-firestone.com/
• Warning Defects
• absence of adequate warnings on products
• e.g. McDonalds 1992 scalding coffee case has led
  to warnings on many disposable coffee cups

25
Product Risk Versus Cost

• Risk of failure and primary cost of production
  are inversely related
• it is materially cheaper to produce an inferior
  product
• but this does not include secondary costs, such
  as litigation, reputation etc.

Ethics in Engineering, M. Martin and R.
Schinzinger, McGraw Hill 1996
26
Limited Liability

• The plaintiff must demonstrate that
• the manufacturer violated a legal responsibility
  to the customer
• the defect actually caused the failure which led
  to injury or loss of property
• Once exception is the principle of patent
  danger, based on legal precedent where
  manufacturers were found not to be liable for
  dangers that were inherently obvious from the use
  of the product
• e.g. falling off a ladder is sufficiently obvious
  not to require a specific warning on the ladder
• With the McDonalds coffee case, it could be
  argued that the risks of opening coffee on your
  lap in a car were obvious
• McDonalds were found liable partly because the
  temperature of their coffee was at 180-190F
  (compared with a typical value of 130-140F in
  other restaurants)
• which is just above the threshold for causing
  burns to human skin www.lectlaw.com

27
Negligence

• Liability may be filed based on several legal
  principles
• which may examine the conduct of the manufacturer
  and/or on the performance of the product
• A defendant is considered negligent if their
  conduct led to an unreasonable exposure of the
  plaintiff to risk
• the defendant need not intend to harm the
  plaintiff, but may be shown not to care
  sufficiently about the plaintiffs welfare
• The responsibility of the defendant is higher if
• there is a higher probability of harm
• the harm is likely to be more serious
• These principles are tempered by the concept that
  no manufacturer can ever ensure that a product is
  totally safe
• it is a question of whether a reasonable person
  would consider that reasonable precautions had
  been taken to ensure safety

28
Product Warranties

• A warranty is a promise made by a manufacturer
  about a product
• it differs from a guarantee, which covers
  services rather than products
• If the product does not meet these promises the
  product is misrepresented the manufacturer may
  be liable
• An express warranty is a promise written or
  verbal that the product will perform certain
  functions for a certain time
• in some ways analogous to a restricted set of
  specifications
• there may be some flexibility in distinguishing
  sales hype from verbal express warranties
• An implied warranty is not explicitly stated but
  is a reasonable expectation based on the purpose
  of the product
• e.g. one would expect that coffee from a fast
  food restaurant is hot
• The USA also has a concept of strict liability
  see textbook
• manufacturer is responsible for any damage
  resulting from the use of the product, regardless
  of whether they were negligent or not

29
Summary

• The professional engineer has a duty to behave
  ethically
• following a codes of ethics is a legal
  requirement of professional engineers in Ontario
• these are designed to assist the engineer in
  determining a course of action in case of a
  dilemma
• The engineers duty to public safety and welfare
  is paramount
• Common issues are
• conflict of interest
• confidentiality
• whistleblowing
• moonlighting
• Companies can be held liable for product failures
  for a variety of reasons
• including negligence and misrepresentation

30
Resources

• Canadian Professional Engineering Practice and
  Ethics, G. Andrews and J. Kemper, Harcourt 1999
• a recommended text for the PEO Professional
  Practice Examination
• Ethics in Engineering, M. Martin and R.
  Schinzinger, McGraw Hill 1996
• www.nspe.org
• case studies and codes of ethics
• www.peo.on.ca
• Ontario code of ethics
• http//ethics.tamu.edu/pritchar/an-intro.htm
• lots of case studies from a course at Texas AM
  University
• For an analysis of whistleblowing since the
  Challenger explosion
• http//www.nspe.org/ethics/eh12Dwhi.asp

31
Whats Next?

• The details of the second part of ENG1000 are
  dependent on the instructor, but may include the
  following
• Completion of the design cycle
• Hazard and failure analysis
• Design analysis
• Implementation
• Basic engineering tools
• AutoCAD
• Major design project, potentially including
  manufacture of prototypes
• Engineering Design II (ENG2000) will include
  other techniques of engineering, materials
  science, mechanical properties of materials and
  structures, electronic properties of materials
• and more design projects!

32
Exercises from PEO Professional Practice Exam

• Question 1
• Shortly after signing a consulting contract with
  the XYZ Company to oversee the construction of a
  new manufacturing plant, you receive a letter
  from Mr. Smith, P.Eng. In his letter Mr. Smith
  points out that he was contracted by the XYZ
  Company for the work that you are now doing. He
  goes on to state that, despite having been
  notified by the XYZ Company that his services are
  no longer required, he feels that he has been
  terminated improperly and has taken the position
  that until the matter is settled he is still
  engaged on this project.
• Do you have any ethical obligation to Mr. Smith?
  Does the receipt of this letter and the knowledge
  of Mr. Smith's position with respect to the XYZ
  Company have any effect on your position vis a
  vis the XYZ Company?

33

• Question 2
• After many years of working together as ABC
  Consultants the partners have come to a parting
  of the ways. "A" and B" are carrying on with the
  old business. C has established a competitive
  business with his son, who is an engineer, and
  has hired two senior Professional Engineers from
  the old firm.
• It has been brought to "As attention by one of
  his clients that C" has sent out a mailing to
  potential clients, including the clients of the
  ABC Company, announcing the new practice and
  soliciting work opportunities for it. A" has
  also heard that in some direct personal
  solicitations "C" has questioned the ability of
  his old firm to perform on certain types of work
  because of the fact that senior staff members
  with specific expertise are no longer there.
  Engineer "B" in discussion with a potential
  client has warned of the danger of dealing with
  engineer C"'s new firm because of its lack of a
  track record working as a company.
• Discuss all aspects of the ethics of this
  situation.