National Society of Professional Engineers, Essay Example

 Despite the fact that the complications presented while the engineer was inspecting the building did not have anything to do with his field of study, it is completely unethical that he or she decided to turn the other cheek. This is due to the manner in which many individuals could become injured in the near future because of this engineer’s decision to not do anything about the task at hand and approve the site as if it were completely safe. These are the kind of decisions that differentiate a good engineer from a bad engineer, and clearly, Engineer A proved himself or herself to be a bad engineer.

 The first and foremost reason as to why it is known that what Engineer A did was completely unethical is due to the reasoning that he or she broke the Code of Ethics for Engineers. In this code, it is boldly stated under the Rules of Practice section that “If engineers’ judgment is overruled under circumstances that endanger life or property, they shall notify their employer or client and such other authority as may be appropriate.” (National Society of Professional Engineers) From this, it can easily be seen that Engineer A’s decision to not do anything about the situation at hand and the decision not to report the problems within the building shows extremely bad judgement. If his or her employer were to discover that Engineer A displayed such poor performance in this case, it would most definitely be means for unemployment. This would especially be the case if anyone were to rent out the building and were then to be injured. This would cause an uproar within the industry, due to the fact that Engineer A was solely responsible for ensuring that the building was completely safe. By not doing so, he has now given his employer bad name. Not only that, but through his un-wise decision to not report the problems with the building, the individual’s injury is in his or her hands due to the fact that he or she was the individual that should have known better than to ignore the ongoing problems with the building.

 The problem with these kind of scenarios is that there are usually few individuals who assume the responsibility of what has happened. For example, if Engineer A would be approached and questioned after the new resident of the building was injured, he or she would most probably deny the fact that he or she was fully aware of the building’s problems. This would happen because Engineer A would know that he or she was wrong in not reporting the things that he or she saw. The company trusted he or she to inspect the building thoroughly, and despite the fact that the problems were not related to those of his or her field of study, Engineer A should have been cognizant of the actuality that the problems that were being presented would cause problems for future residents. Engineer A would most probably also act dumfounded with all questions regarding the case, as he or she would not want of any of the blame placed on him or her.     

 The only manner though which these kinds of scenarios can be avoided is by engineering schools and/or companies informing engineers that when they are inspecting buildings, they are to provide a full report of all complications within the building. It can be argued that it is not the engineer’s responsibility to check for things outside of his or her field of study, but the fact of the matter is that whenever and wherever there are human lives at risk, it is everybody’s responsibility to provide a well-maintained environment.