Changing recommendations in report to suit client 8

[s0eebuch]

Ok, so I wrote a report on a system, providing a summary of the data from our inspections and then recommendations for repair or replacement.

My boss reviewed the report and told me to change a number of my recommendations. His reasoning was, "The client won't like what you've proposed. They normally just replace the component instead of repair it when adjacent components are to be replaced. Change your recommendations."

I felt uncomfortable with the changes because the data from our inspections did not support a replacement of this component, only replacement of the adjacent components. As a precaution, I recommended a new coating on all components - but not replacement. My report clearly stated this and provided support from the data our field inspection crew obtained. The inspection data was also included in the report as an appendix.

I made the changes as requested but I approached my boss, explaining that I did not agree with the change in recommendations from that which I had proposed. Therefore, I asked if I could put his name on the report instead of mine. He agreed and appeared somewhat surprised at my request.

The problem is that now I have reason to believe he is unhappy with my choice of actions. I am worried about the possible repercussions but I feel I couldn't ethically sign a report for recommendations that I did not agree.

Am I making a big deal out of nothing? Should I stand firm? Or is tailoring recommendations based on client preferences a common occurrence?

 

[msquared48]

Ron...Learn?

Heck he still lives in Florida with all those Hurricanes, and ... Gators, and ... Water Moccassins, and ... Pythons! I ain't talkin' football here either...

What value is his opinion?

Mike McCann
MMC Engineering
Motto: KISS
Motivation: Don't ask

 

[Ron]

Hey Mike! Not much...ask my wife!!

The only thing you guys up there have that I wish we had a little more of here is humidity!! Don't want the gators, pythons, and water moccasins to dry out. Sometimes 95 degrees and 95 percent rh just ain't enough!

 

[msquared48]

Have a good weekend Ron!

.

Mike McCann
MMC Engineering
Motto: KISS
Motivation: Don't ask

 

[Ron]

Thanks, Mike...you too.

 

[csd72]

I can understand the clients attitude. If you have to have downtime anyway then you might as well replace all wearing parts in the vicinity.

As others have noted, the cost of downtime may far outweigh any of the costs that you are aware of.

We get this sort of thing in my industry quite often. If the factory costs 20% more to build then it is often worth it if the factory is up and running 6 months earlier.

 

[s0eebuch]

Thanks again for all the responses.

Not to belabor the point, but the "components" to which I referred earlier are precast concrete manholes and the "adjacent components" are concrete sewer mains.

I wanted to present the issue as objectively as possible, so as to garner objective feedback from all, so I tried to keep descriptions vague. In retrospect, more thoroughly describing the items probably didn't matter, considering the issue.

FYI

 

[photoengineer]

Concrete manholes are expensive. I think that is why the city hired an engineer to do an analysis and determine whether it needed to be replaced.

While I may have taken a more diplomatic approach with my supervisor, I don't think that requiring replacement because the client would prefer to replace the manhole would make good sense.

An engineer could say that while the condition of the manhole indicated that it does not need to be replaced, the manhole could be replaced at the utility or contractors preference might be a way to meet in the middle.

Cedar Bluff Engineering

http://cedarbluffengineering.webs.com

 

[DwayneM]

I think photoengineer's on the right track there, since (a) chances are the manholes are the same age as the adjacent pipes, and may not last through an entire life cycle of the pipes, (b)replacing adjacent pipes would require quite a bit of work on the manholes which may damage the connections as opposed to installation of new ones, and (c)If the repair includes road closure/ repair, you want to do everything you can to open it up as little as possible.

While the *condition* of the manholes may not warrant replacement, the surrounding activity and remaining service life may. It's your boss's call.

 

[casseopeia]

My recent experience with my last report has given me a new outlook on this question. My last investigation report was heavily edited by the Client, a developer. He purchased a building where the original developer/contractor defaulted and then skipped town.....to China.

I won't bore everyone with all the details, but one change stands out above all others. The developer wanted me to change my recommendations on the commercial storefront system that had been installed without the internal water diverters, leaving open gaps in the frames at all the joints. The storefront frames leaked like a sieve during spray testing to the point where the stipulated time for the tests could not be achieved without flooding the building. My recommendation, de-glaze the system and install the diverters.

The developer wanted me to put in my report that they had planned to install awnings, and therefore the windows would not be as prone to leaking and would not need to be repaired. I refused citing the section of the code (Section 1403 of the CBC if interested). In California, this is not a gray area. The code is very specific about weathertight or water-managed construction.

What shocked me is that my own boss wanted me to go along with the suggestion saying it was not big deal and would make the client happy so he would pay the bill. I still refused and highlighted the code section for my boss. I really don't know where things ended up, but kept a copy of my original report just in case. I'm hoping the powers in charge came to their senses.

I made many revisions to that report that I did not entirely agree with and changed the conclusion to a meaningless paragraph of current business buzzwords (posted in the language and grammar forum). But I think there are definitely times where you must stand by your principals. How else do you keep your own integrity intact?

"Gorgeous hair is the best revenge." Ivana Trump

 

[patprimmer]

Cass

More to the point, how do you keep your license intact and how do you avoid losing your shirt in the ensuing law suit from shop operators when their business gets ruined and YOUR signature is on the document approving the code violations.

Regards
Pat
See FAQ731-376 for tips on use of eng-tips by professional engineers &

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm

for site rules

 

[casseopeia]

Yes, Pat you are right. I believe you can loose your professional license if you refuse to abide by the building code, at least without a variance. At minimum it is a serious violation of ethics.

The Developer was concerned that conclusions and recommendations in my report, if left unaddressed in the redevelopment project, could be used as evidence in a lawsuit brought by future condo owners. My response was that he should be more concerned about Consultants called as percipient witnesses walking in to court with their original recommendations and his own (the Developer's) handwritten changes to the report.

As I said, the experience not only left a bad taste, but gave me a different perspective on what can happen with this issue.

"Gorgeous hair is the best revenge." Ivana Trump

 

[lacajun]

casseopeia, I've found engineers w/out the license woefully lacking in the understanding of consequences for breaching laws and ethics. I have not run into licensed engineers that take it cavalierly. But they exist because some State Boards publish their infractions and disciplinary actions.

I've contacted State Boards on issues and learned quickly just how serious infractions are. I'll walk away before I jeopardize my license.

Ultimately, I learned Professional Engineers bear the burden of policing themselves and there is little recourse and/or support from Boards because the buck is supposed to stop with you. You are the Professional Engineer and no one should trump your professional opinion. You are entitled to your professional opinion. These statements and recent problems are why I am now requesting to be on equal footing with management on these issues. I refuse to be labeled as insubordinate because I refuse to break the law or code of conduct.