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

 

[IRstuff]

It's not even clear than someone who is NOT conservative is not ethical. What's the threshold of allowable risk? The legal system is rife with phrases like "reasonable," and "foreseable," etc.

Since seismic codes do not ensure zero risk, one could argue that the seismic codes themselves are not ethical, could one? Seismic codes do not ensure no loss of life, or even no injuries; the only assurance is that the building will not collapse under the current baseline survivable earthquake. A new earthquake often raises the survival threshold, as in the case of Loma Prieta. Did that make the prior codes unethical because the 880 freeway collapsed during the Loma Prieta quake and killed 40 people?

Ethics is often bell-shaped, and only those that are the 3+ sigma guys would be "reasonably" branded by the rest as being unethical.

Now, consider the multi-ton slabs hung with epoxied bolts in the Big Dig. It was stupid, but yet to be proven unethical.

TTFN

FAQ731-376

 

[msquared48]

IRstuff:

I believe you are getting onto the "reasonable and prudent" range here, which should leave it up to the judgment of your peers.

Show me a 12 person jury that was ever made up of 12 structural engineers. So goes the "peer" theory. Ain't justice great?

Mike McCann
McCann Engineering

 

[GregLocock]

If an engineer can demonstrate that the cost to society from a less safe design, is less than the cost from a more safe design, which is the ethical choice?

Specifically:

If a death is valued at $4E6

I sell 1E6 cars per year, for 4 years. The car will last for 10 years.

I can fit a steel plate to the car which will save one death per year, over the total life of the model. What is the maximum the steel plate should cost for an ethical engineer to fit it? Does the answer depend on whether the engineer works for a consultant, or for the manufacturer, or for the government?







Cheers

Greg Locock

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

 

[lesjr413]

Ashereng,
I don't think that RARSWC is making a blanket statement about contractors at all. The contracting company I work for is very ethical and honest in their business, however, we are driven by out-doing the competition and making money (what contractor isn't?). If we bid a job and then design it, the design is expected to fall within the budget. If it doesn't, that's a problem with the numbers guys.
It seems we can't always have the most conservitive design (as RARSWC pointed out) if it must fall within our bid price. And in the HVAC/R business sometimes a conservative approach is an efficient approach that is best for the environment (as BJC pointed out) but we can't do that because it doesn't fall within our budget.
I know some contrators are crooked and will do whatever it takes to make a buck, but I also know that a lot of them aren't. And hopefully the one's that aren't crooked are the only ones hiring engineers. So really, it seems to me, that it completely depends on the company, who they hire, and how they have leared to make correct competitive bids.

 

[graybeach]

If we could always be as conservative as possible - our jobs would be easy. But we can't for a variety of reasons. We have to walk the fine line. This is what makes our work interesting and why we make the BIG BUCKS!

 

[Gymmeh]

The generalization of contractors cutting corners to compromise ethics and safety is a bit extreme.

This topic really depends on a lot of variables, location being the biggest one. The size of the job and the experience of all involved. From the contractor’s side, rework is not free, if an inspector comes to the sit and tells them something FUBAR.

The situation I have seen working as/for a contractor. Is that the structural design may not be correct, and the supervisor in the site catches it. Like GrayBeach said, some of those guys know their job to a 1/16th of an inch.
There are a few things that can happen

1) They have to send the drawing back through the consulting firm, the architect looks at it which then gives it to a PE…mean while the contractor is working hard to keep his boys busy and after a day three of the firm sitting on the drawings, the supervisor needs to give the boys half the day off to save money in labor.

2) The contractor can give the drawing to their in house engineer who knows Most/All the details of the job already; get the drawing backs that afternoon with the design changes and keeps the job rolling.
(Obviously simplified for this example, but you get the point)

I have never worked for a contractor that would knowingly break the law, and often knew the jobs better then some of the engineers. Everyone tries to say money.
Like Eddy side, NYS has a lot of laws and inspectors to keep people honest –and a lot of lawyers!

 

[BJC]

Some contractors love some engineers because they are like having the key to the vault. Incomplete designs, impractical designs and even over conserative designs.
I have seen this situation more than once and in 99 % of the cases it was engineering that opened the moneybag for the contractor.
It's ultimately the owners fault, they start out by hiring the cheapest engineer they can find. They don't realize the cheapest thing you can have on a job is good engineering.

 

[BJC]

One more time with the boat, check the name on the dingy.

 

[lesjr413]

That is one definite plus of working for a contractor!

 

[RARWOOD]

First I want to make it clear that I am not trying to imply that all contractors are unethical or crooks.

With Contractors, as well as Engineers, very very few are crooks. I graduated in 1978 and have work with quiet a few contractors large and small over the years. Of those contractors I never found one I thought was crooked or even dishonest. And yes I have seen contractors add water to increase the slump of the concrete they were pouring or float rebar into footings.

Regarding ethics, a contractor who puts pressure on his engineer to design right to the numbers or to follow design practices of the competition, is probably not acting in an unethical manner. He or she is not asking the engineer to violate the design code. The contractor would only be acting in an unethical manner if he or she knew that the design practice of his competition violate the code and he or she was pressuring the engineer to follow that design practice.

 

[graybeach]

Nice Photo BJC. Painful to look at on a dreary November day though.

 

[vesselfab]

dreary?

sunny and 73*F here

 

[IRstuff]

But, it's up to the engineer to maintain his own ethical and legal obligations, regardless of who he works for.

If the PE acts correctly, and his employer knows that he's not being overly conservative, then all should be copacetic. If neither trusts the other to attain the proper balance, then it's time to get a new employer.

TTFN

FAQ731-376

 

[JStephen]

I would like to point out in the midst of all this that in many fields, it is the practice to REQUIRE the contractor's PE to perform certain design work. It's not like contractors just hire PE's for fun or something.

Consider this, though. A consultant is hired at a set fee to perform a certain design. He can do a more thorough job and take longer, or less thorough and make more money per hour. Isn't that a conflict of interest at least equal to that found in contracting? Can we assume that all consultants must be unethical because they must all cut corners on their designs to make more money?