ethical question - warped trusses and the engineer's role

[SLTA]

Hi folks,

Say that you work for a wood truss manufacturer who sold trusses to a school, and you happened to be at the school site one day for non-professional reasons. Say then that you noticed these trusses had been exposed to rain for some time and had warped (they had not yet been erected and were still bundled together on the ground).

What is your responsibility as an engineer and/or as an employee of the truss manufacturer? Should you notify the school that they should just keep the trusses covered, or should you tell them that the trusses may not be safe to erect? Or another option, like do nothing? There are liability issues involved, too.

cheers.

 

[Mr168]

Anything surrounding public safety should be a no-brainer IMO...

 

[SLTA]

And that's true, but it's not clear that there is a public safety issue, yet. It's not clear that the trusses aren't safe and they haven't been erected yet.

 

[ischgl99]

Which makes it the best time to say something, they have not incurred the cost of erecting the trusses and can easily do something about it. You have an ethical and moral obligation to notify the school and the contractor that there could be a problem with the trusses being left out in the rain and they should be inspected before they are erected. You will also want to notify your boss about the issue since the contractor will most likely come back to your company about this if your storage instructions were lacking.

 

[SNORGY]

It's a school. You have no choice but to alert the stakeholders, in my mind. In fact, if you didn't, in a court of law, you might be held accountable anyway, even if it was none of your business to begin with, based on your background and expertise in the area of trusses.


Regards,

SNORGY.

 

[Ron]

If for no other reason, as an employee of the truss manufacturer you should protect your own liability by notifying whomever is responsible for the jobsite materials storage and protection, that their procedures are contrary to the manufacturer's recommendations and will result in cancellation of any warranty or liability assumption for design and manufacturing.

Improper storage of trusses can severely reduce the shear capacity of plate connectors. This becomes a potential safety issue. You don't wait for confirmation of a safety issue...you warn first then let the chips fall.

Send a letter to the Facilities director of the school system, to the contractor, and to the structural engineer of record.

 

[kelowna]

Agree with all other comments. You have an ethical duty to report the issue, and most probably also a legal obligation imposed by the code of ethics of the local association.

 

[SLTA]

thanks, everyone. that's what I thought too, but heard other opinions, so wanted more.

cheers.

 

[oneintheeye]

case in UK where an engineer went to a site and didn't comment/report on a safety issue that was nothing to do with him or his visit (think it was a trench collapse in the end), anyway the outcome was that as a professional engineer he should have realised the problem (in this case I believe it was no support to trench) and done something about it. I'll look for it later, can't remember if it was in court or a proffesional misconduct charge by one of the institutions. I'd imagine in US with your strict licensure issues etc would be even more rigourous.

 

[Ron]

herewegothen is correct. You have an obligation to report a potentially unsafe condition. Do it. You'll probably pi$$ someone off, but so be it. The contractor should know better. Hopefully your company has written jobsite storage recommendations that would have been given to the contractor upon delivery. If not, I would suggest you develop them.

 

[SLTA]

We do have excellent written storage instructions, along with all the associated Truss Plate Institute literature. We have let the owner know about the situation as well as the EOR. Thanks for your thoughts!

 

[Ron]

slta...way to go!!

 

[ash060]

That is why I dislike going to the field, you end up seeing what contractors are really doing, scary.

 

[HamishMcTavish]

My 2p...

How can there be liability raising the fact that there may be an issue in using the trusses. Several possible outcomes:

1) The contractor does check them out and decides they can use them so how can you be held liable?

2) The contractor does not check them out and use them - again how can you be held liable?

3) They do check them out and find they can't use them then you've saved them some time and money - again how can you be held liable?

If you didn't report and something bad ultimately happened - for you to be liable they would have to a) know that you were at the school b) had noticed and c) did nothing. the first two could be very hard to do. I would worry more about living with my conscience!

Kind regards, HM

No more things should be presumed to exist than are absolutely necessary - William of Occam

 

[oneintheeye]

hamish the case in the UK I referred to earlier was around the fact the engineer went to site, passed by the problem and did nothing (if he didn't realise there was a problem HE SHOULD HAVE. i.e. he was blamed for not seeing the problem that someone of his standing should have seen. i.e. if your a truss manufacturer and you go to a site you should be able to see if there is a obvious problem with a truss lying on the ground. if you did'nt notice - you should have. An e-mail went around our company after the case to tell us to look out for obvious unsafe issues/problems whenever we visit site with the example as a case in point.

 

[HamishMcTavish]

herewegothen,

Please could you post the details of the case or provide a reference or link? I'd like to have a look to see what the reasoning behind the prosecution / disciplinary was.

Many thanks, HM

No more things should be presumed to exist than are absolutely necessary - William of Occam

 

[Ron]

How can there be liability raising the fact that there may be an issue in using the trusses. Several possible outcomes:
1) The contractor does check them out and decides they can use them so how can you be held liable?
2) The contractor does not check them out and use them - again how can you be held liable?
3) They do check them out and find they can't use them then you've saved them some time and money - again how can you be held liable?

1-Contractor does not have the qualifications to decide their acceptability. He decides, you don't object, you buy his decision...if he's wrong, you're liable as the professional who should know.

2-Contractor should not make the decision on acceptability. Since you've seen them, you're obligated to warn. If you warn and are ignored by all...your liability is reduced, but you'll still have to prove you adequately warned.

3-No problem...new trusses. Contractor loses money for truss replacements because of poor storage.

 

[HamishMcTavish]

Ron, my point was that once the contractor has been told there might be a problem THEY are obligated to establish whether there is. If they don't have the expertise to assess the issue then they need to hire it in. How can someone with no contractual links be held liable - it's not equitable!

There is good negligence case law (in the UK at least) which establishd the principle that if you offer advice in a professional capacity (even 'off duty')and somebody relies upon it and suffers damages / loss etc then you can be held liable. Frankly i wouldn't hire anybody who couldn't decide themselves to do something about a possible safety issue like using a warped truss.

I cannot see how if you warn and are ignored you would attract liability - even in the US!

Kind regards, HM

No more things should be presumed to exist than are absolutely necessary - William of Occam

 

[BJC]

I would notify the contractor and copy the project manager for the school system (assumin they have one or equivalent).
I would also copy the principal of the school, head of the school board and the state board of engineering. I ight include the truss manufacturer as well.
I would sign the letter with a PE after my name. It's your duty. I would phrase the comments with things "in my professional opinion..." etc.

IF my kid got hurt in a collapse of the structure and I knew you saw what you did and said nothing. I am sure I could turn over a few rocks and get a lawyer to include you in the lawsuit.

 

[rowingengineer]

They are the Irvine case in Perth and
"the Cordonne case in Canberra both
happened at schools and involved
accidents with glass which did not
comply with the current Australian
Standard which was first introduced in
1972.

The leading litigators we sought advice
from on this issue informed us that the
success of these cases were
underpinned by a special part of law
that confers a higher than normal
responsibility on institutions which
care for children."

Here is an extra from a legal advice given to Australian engineers working on School projects, Note the higher than normal responsibility.

An expert is a man who has made all the mistakes which can be made in a very narrow field