June 2014

ON ETHICS: YOU BE THE JUDGE
International Incident

A US engineer discovers a Canadian firm has been performing engineering services without meeting the necessary state requirements.

What Do You Think?
Was it ethical for Jim Tegun to advise the State A engineering licensing board in writing of the unlicensed practice by the Canadian firm?

What the Board of Ethical Review Said
The practice of engineering increasingly occurs across international borders, which sometimes raises ethical issues for professional engineers and their firms. Engineering ethics principles are generally the same in most jurisdictions, although ethical values vary in some cases. Engineers practicing internationally or locally with international firms should be mindful of differences when they occur.

While the facts in this case involve an American engineer doing business with foreign engineers and a foreign engineering company in the US, the Board believes some of the principles from earlier BER cases apply here. An American engineer working with international parties becomes aware of some type of illegal and unethical conduct; in the earlier cases, the engineer had the option of declining participation and walking away from the project, while in this, Tegun has already provided professional engineering services and later becomes aware of the possible violation of the law.

It is the Board’s view that Jim Tegun had an ethical obligation to take action in connection with the Canadian firm’s apparent violation of the state engineering licensure requirements. At the same time, it may have been more respectful and diplomatic for Tegun to advise the Canadian firm of the action he planned to take and to provide an explanation for the action (e.g., Tegun’s obligation to report under the state engineering licensing law or the Code of Ethics), thus giving the Canadian firm an opportunity to become compliant on future projects rather than summarily reporting the potential violation by the Canadian firm to the state engineering licensing board.

Conclusion
Tegun had an ethical obligation to take action in connection with the Canadian firm’s apparent violation of the state engineering licensure requirements. However, under the circumstances, he should have first advised the Canadian firm of the action he planned to take and to provide an explanation for the action—he could also have encouraged the firm to self-report.

NSPE Code References
Section I.6: Engineers in the fulfillment of their professional duties shall conduct themselves honorably, responsibly, ethically, and lawfully so as to enhance the honor, reputation, and usefulness of the profession.
Section II.1.e: Engineers shall not aid or abet the unlawful practice of engineering by a person or firm.
Section II.1.f: Engineers having knowledge of any alleged violation of this Code shall report thereon to appropriate professional bodies and, when relevant, also to public authorities, and cooperate with the proper authorities in furnishing such information or assistance as may be required.
Section III.7: Engineers shall not attempt to injure, maliciously or falsely, directly or indirectly, the professional reputation, prospects, practice, or employment of other engineers. Engineers who believe others are guilty of unethical or illegal practice shall present such information to the proper authority for action.

For more information, please see BER Case No. 11-3.