Case 92-1. According to the engineering ethics that is based on the Code I.3, credit providing for the work of engineers to those for whom the credit is lying is fundamental responsibility. This is essential to the situation when the engineer cannot cope with the work because of the poor education, experience no expertise for the needed services performing. In this case, according to the Code II.3.a, the definite engineer has to inform the client about this situation. This case is also about responsibility-taking for the professional engineer because of his decisions and actions. Therefore, it is unethical for A engineer to fail for credit giving to the B engineer for the part of the designing work he had performed.
Case 82-2. According to the Code III.4 about confidential information of the client’s business affairs, it is the engineer who is responsible for the confidential information that was given to him/her due to the service providing situation. However, in the definite case there was no transmission of the client’s confidential information. From the case information it is easy to understand that engineer A had no special motive that made him to open the information to all parties that were interested in this information. However, due to the different parts of ethic engineers code, it seems unethically for engineer A to give the information concerning inspection of the home to the firm that represents its owners.
Case 79-5. According to the Code 3(e) that is about the declaring the engineer to allow him/her to give the client exaggerated information about the one’s qualification. Under these circumstances it should be noted that engineer A had charged about his knowledge in the professional standards. It is also ineffectively to give just the name of organization that awarded the engineer by the Ph.D. degree, because such organization can have nothing besides the name and be bad educational institution. Therefore, for the particular engineer in these circumstances it was unethical just to cite his Ph.D. degree as received academic qualification.
Case 83-3. According to the Code III.10.a of the Code of Ethics it becomes clear that the actions of engineer A are in contradictions to its content. It also can be argued that this Code addresses to the situations when the main engineers fails in credit giving to the responsible for the definite design services employee, but not where the work is submitted by the couple of companies. According to the situation, the engineer A had violated the Code III.10 and III.10.a because of the non-fulfillment of his/her direct obligations that were connected to the usages of the engineer B proposal, his/her compensation and payment, etc. Therefore, engineer A acted unethically because of the engineers B’s proposal usage without his/ her consent.
Case 99-11. According to the NSPE Code, the engineer is responsible for the health of publicity and their safety, and has to perform all obligations to his/her client or employer. In this case, it is not fully clear about the set of actions that engineer A can take under the definite circumstances. Furthermore, the fact that all necessary actions for the safeguarding company’s employees were taking in appropriate way is being confirmed. However, definite engineer should take into an account that some facts can change this conclusion in further examination. Therefore, engineer A had no obligations to take set of actions under the definite circumstances and facts.
In 2009 the situation that has happened because of the investigation of the organization “American Society of Civil Engineers” of the levee failures during the Hurricane Katrina was highly discussed. This statement is still highly covered and there is no opinion about situation. From one hand, the ASCE president states that there were no cahoots among ASCE and corps, and these words can be seen just like the misunderstanding. However, from the other hand, a lot of facts are “talking” about reverse. This situation gives food for thoughts about the clarity and lucidity of the ASCE performance.
From customer #3909 to Writer Thank you very much for the paper, it totally points out the ideas I meant...Read more...
|Destiny of the Republic||End-of-life Care and Decision Making|