Engineer Working For Contractor Ethics... 3

[lesjr413]

I've heard of mechanical contractors who have in-house PE engineers. Obviously they are there to design and stamp work received for the contracting company.
Is this considered a conflict of interest?
I can see how this is greatly beneficial to a contracting company to have in-house engineers but I also wonder if that engineer could be completely objective.
Is this industry standard and considered acceptable? I'm still fairly new to the contracting and engineering world so I'm soaking up all I can get.
Thanks.

E.I.T.
Atlanta, GA

 

[BJC]

lesjr413

Are you assuming all contractors are unethical?
Are all engineers who work for engineering firms ethical?
I don't see how you can ask it it's unethical.
Having worked for a contractor I can say that I have never felt like my ethics were compromised.
The advantages of design-build are speed and quality of the design.

 

[DonPhillips]

What would be the conflict you are foreseeing?

Don Phillips

http://worthingtonengineering.com

 

[IRstuff]

How is there a conflict of interest that's different from the fact that a PE still has to get paid by a client for his work?

TTFN

FAQ731-376

 

[vesselfab]

Actually, I find the thought insulting.

 

[Ashereng]

I work for an EPCM company. Yes, the company is a "contractor". We do engineering services - so we have to employ engineers. What seems to be unethical?

An employment or contract is neither ethical or unethical.

The actions of people are ethical or unethical.

Oh, by the way, the world of contracting and engineering are not different worlds - they are one in the same.

"Do not worry about your problems with mathematics, I assure you mine are far greater."
Albert Einstein
Have you read FAQ731-376 to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?

 

[MedicineEng]

Well, don't beat more on lesjr413. He had a doubt, he asked. Continue like that, don't keep any question unanswered just because you are afraid to ask.
I believe that it was the right move, even if for some of us the question might be a little bit unnapropriate.
Well, my oppinion seconds of the colleageus that already replied.
You cannot assume a conflict of interest in this case, you have to assume that persons are professionals. Also, in another hand, being the PE responsible for what it stamps, it is in his own interest to cope with the codes and standards.
If you assume that there is a conflict of interest in this case what do you say about a doctor that works in an insurance company approving reimbursements to patients or a teacher that recomends his own book to the class? You see, conflict of interest is a very thin line...

 

[DRC1]

I am a PE. I work for a contractor. i did at one time work for a consultant. Now project managers review designs and ask "is this necessary?" Some times yes, some times, it may not. Ensuring you get the product you want requires support of management and your oversight. Working for a consultant had its issues too. Once the plans were done our resposibility for the product ended. However the challenge there was how much design and anlysis and research should be done vs. budget. Every job has its own challenges.

 

[lesjr413]

Thank you for your responses.
Like I said, I'm new to the practice of engineering so I'm still trying to figure the fine line of ethics in this business. Don't be offended, there's no need to be...
My main concern stems from this:
Engineers who are working for a contracting company who might cut corners, make a less than ideal design, all because the boss is breathing price, price, price down their necks. For instance... a contracting company has already bid a job on a design-build project, then they take it to their engineer to be designed and the engineer realizes there isn't enough money in the bid to do the job properly. He tell the boss to get more money from the client, and you all know how much bosses like to give away money. Does he make a sub-par design instead? One that might work, but sub-par nonetheless.
Obviously it is up to the engineer to stand firm in what he consideres acceptable and hopefully won't be influenced to make a wrong decision for fear of his job.
For those of you who say you do work or worked for contracting companies, what do you do in a situation like that?
This is mainly a question for firms that are contracting companies first, that provide their own engineers for design-build.
Thanks.

 

[BJC]

lesjr413
Playing "what-if" is the second most popular indoor sport in the world.
I'll give you one that I have seen more often than your hypothetical case.
What if your working for an engineering firm and they bid ( yes- they bid jobs just like contractors) a job for less hours than it takes to do it. So you get the job to do and to do it right would normally take 3000 MHs. Your boss says " We have only got 2200 MHs to this job." So what do you do? a.) Do a less than adequite job and let the contractor figure it out ( that happens enought that many contractors have engineers on staff to finish half designed jobs). b.) Work free on Saturdays and a couple of hours extra everyday to get it done. You may have to convince others that work for you to do the same thing. You can appeal to their professionalism and convince them that it's in their best intrest and/or promise comp-time, promotions etc. c.) Tell your boss that that's not enough time and it's not going to work that there is "not enough money in the bid to do the job properly".
I have see enough of item "a" and "b" to know that "c" is the right answer.
Contractractors know more about engineering than engineers know about contractors. Contractors will generally listen to an engineer more attentively than another engineer. They may ask me to look for another solution, say "try this" etc. but in the end I have never had to compromise the integrity of a job. I can't say the same for engineering firms ( that's why I don't work for them.)

 

[EddyC]

I've worked for engineering firms who consistently underbid jobs and then would send the work out "as is" when the money ran out. The attitude was "the contractor will figure it out". I've also worked as an engineering subcontractor to one of the largest EPC firms in the world, one that is a household name. They would always try to cut corners and try to get me to accept non-code compliant construction "as is". So I've seen it from both perspectives. I do know that New York State requires Design/Build projects to be led by engineers and not by contractors. I wonder if it is enforced, however.

 

[graybeach]

I have worked on several "design build" projects. This was exactly the situation you describe, except that my company (the engineer) is a subcontractor to the construction contractor. At first, I pondered the very question the OP asked. As I got into the work, I figured out that my duty was to provide the contractor with a design that was economical and met the code and any other contractural requirements. It was also my duty to protect the contractor from installing something that did not meet code that would have to be ripped out later.

If I decided to make a plate a few 1/16s thicker just for the heck of it, the contractor called me on it. If there was not compelling reason to have a thicker plate, I had to make it thinner. If there was a good reason, like fewer splices, maybe the plate would stay thicker.

I found this to be a great experience, once I got into the rhythm of working with the contractor this way. There were really no ethical issues, but sometimes there way yelling when I had bad news for the contractor.

 

[vesselfab]

""""Engineers who are working for a contracting company who might cut corners, make a less than ideal design"""

Ideal. Now that is a wonderful word.I think most designs are less than Ideal. Except maybe government work with unlimited budgets.

If it works, if it is legal, if it is ethical, within budget

Then it's ideal enough for me.

I'm sorry, take me with a grain of salt.
I have a very low tolerance for "what if" questions of ethics.

 

[TXiceman]

Basically a PE is supposed to only stamp reports, designs, drawings or calculations for items which he has directly supervised, done himself or herself and within his field of expertese. Now you can have a junior engineer working under you that does the work at your direction and review where you have direct responsibility for the design.

You can not review and stamp items designed by someone not under your direction or supervision.

I do not see how working under these conditions is not considered ethical whether you work for a consultant or a contracotr. The contractor should not be stamping someone elses design work under any circumstances nor should he require his engineer to stamp someone elses work. Stamping work that you did not do and out of your field is a good way to loose a license.

Ken



Ken
KE5DFR

 

[Senselessticker]

I'm a bit confused by the question...

However, it is VERY common (and actually the norm) for design and/or design/build companies to employ and utilize PE's. If Company A is under contract with Company B to design [whatever...], (and assuming the design requires a P.E. stamp) who else (by law) can stamp the design besides the design contractor?????

Also... using "contracting" companies for design and/or design/build services is as industry standard as it gets...

 

[msquared48]

To me, this is a bidder-design issue.

If this is the case, the contractor will eventually have to have a Mechanical Enginer do the work so that he can bid the project. If the contractor does a lot of this type of work, it may pay him to permanently hire a Mechanical Engineer as an employee to do the work.

I do not see a problem here or any conflict of interest.

Mike McCann
McCann Engineering

 

[RARWOOD]

I believe there are a number of major differences between working for a consulting firm and working for a contractor. When a Strutural Engineer is hired to design a building, as the EOR the engineer's primary responsibility is the protection of life and property.

An engineer who is a direct employee of the contractor has the primary responsibility of making money for the contractor. As a result the engineer is often under pressure to produce a design that is right to the numbers.

This pressure reduces the engineers ability to exercise judgement. If bolts with threads included in the shear plane will check, then the engineer can't exercise judgement and call for custom bolts that will exclude the threads from the shear plane based on his or hers experience that the threads will cut into the plates being attached.

Engineers who are employed by the contractor are also pressured to design as the engineers do, who work for the contractor's competition. If the competition is resisting all the wind load in a multi-story wood framed building with the drywall then the contractor will expect drywall to be used instead of plywood on the shearwalls.

A final difference is that conservative engineers generally don't remain employeed by contractors very long. In general the designs of conservative engineers will be more expensive.

 

[Ashereng]

RARSWC

I disagree. An engineer is ethical or not, based on his actions, not who he works for.

What you are saying, in effect, is that "ALL" contractors are unethical. I personally find that offensive. For anyone to make such a blanket implication seems unethical - even prejudiced?

To say such and such a company plays it tight is one thing - if you can prove it. To say "contractors" play it tight, without any proof, is prejudicial in my view.

"Do not worry about your problems with mathematics, I assure you mine are far greater."
Albert Einstein
Have you read FAQ731-376 to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?

 

[GregLocock]

"An engineer who is a direct employee of the contractor has the primary responsibility of making money for the contractor. "

Possibly

"A professional engineer who is a direct employee of the contractor has the primary responsibilities of making money for the contractor whilst ensuring that the design is safe and meets the customer's requirements."

Would be closer to my understanding.





Cheers

Greg Locock

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

 

[BJC]

Is an engineer who designs with conservativism in his/her design more ethical than one who designs to more economical standards that meet all codes and are more constructable.
In these times is it ethical to design with no concern for use of material and energy?
The engineer is the ultimate economist. Squandering the earths resources in conserative design is unethical.
I have worked with contractors who pressured for economical design. Sometimes they had suggestion that were good and I changed my design. Sometimes they suggested ideals that would use less material and/or be faster. I never changed my design.
I have never had to change a design because of pressure from a contractor. When I drew the line it stood.

Ashereng. Your right on. If some people think contractors are so crooked I would advise them to get out of the business. Engineers and contractors are the industry a lot of us are in. If it felt that dirty to me I would get out.