Ethics and NAFTA 1

All,

http://onlineethics.org/essays/intl/nafta.html

This is an interesting essay based upon the practice of engineering under NAFTA.

 

[rhodie]

A question:

The essay describes that all pertinent codes are to be followed. In the case of a Engineer in Canada working on a project being constructed in Mexico, which local regulations apply?

If the regs. in Mexico are obviously lagging behind those in Canada, does the engineer take the high road and apply his work to the more strict codes even if it is considered needless by the client?

What if the engineer finds himself in a situation where the project ambient infrastructure doesn't support his local regulations? (i.e. wastewater/groundwater runoff or electrical & plumbing)

 

[PSE]

If you read through some of the ethical reviews that NSPE had done and published (they can be found in other locations at the initial posts website link), holding one's work to the "higher" standard would apply. The "Paramount" rule is the safety and well-being of the public.

 

[VoyageofDiscovery]

Hi PSE,

In my opinion, ethics across borders is extremely complicated. Many western companies have a hard time being truely successful due to these cultural obstacles. A blanket approach of western ethics in less developed countries may be an impossibility. However, doing the best one can, where and when one can, in reality is all that one can do, short of losing the job that in actuality serves a greater good.

Regards

VOD

 

[PSE]

VOD,

With the exception of your "...short of losing the job that in actuality serves a greater good", I would agree. Even using the best of intentions, by submitting to an unethical act (even though perhaps considered the norm in that country), you would end up condoning its continued practice. It may not make good business sense (in the short term) as the company would have potentially or probably lost the business opportunity. For the company that does compromise its standards, what happens the next time? How would you deal with say, a corrupt official who keeps "upping the ante" for doing continued business?

Regards,

 

[VoyageofDiscovery]

PSE,

As an N.American engineer working on projects in less developed countries, I don't see the project as a business opportunity but more as an opportunity to help in the development of the country. Yes, that's an altruistic position that one can hide behind, but after growing up in many of these countries, I feel I am entitled to say this and also do my part.

One should never compromise one's standards. Everyone has there own degree of standards in a given situation and if anyone thinks otherwise they are truely living in a fantasy world or fortunate enough to not have been placed in such a position. That being said to answer your first question, the company should not compromise its standards whatever they may be.

Wrt your question of money, I presume, this is a negotiation process the company and the foreign government official must agree upon. This is a difficult job but the successful companies develop relationships with their counterparts in government. When doing such international projects, money must be set aside with this in mind. Is this an ethical issue or an administration fee. The banks have all kinds of administration fees for each transaction albeit a less percentage or flat fee. Well, this cantankerous point can be argued in the West till the cows come home. If they can't agree, well, walk away. If there is agreement then legality in the country in question is the issue and how that is handled is an art left to the lawyers. As I said before ethics across borders is very complex as we are not dealing with people living in a homogenous western society and they have their own realities.

Regards

VOD

 

[PM]

Many engineers seem to make this ethics thing far more complicated than it need be.

Presummably no one will disagree that there are a spectrum of laws in place, to which we all must comply if we are to conduct ourselves lawfully. Some of these are:[ul][li]international laws,[/li][li]federal laws,[/li][li]state / provincial / territorial laws,[/li][li]municipal laws, or regulations[/li][li]local community / sub-division laws,[/li][li]church laws and[/li][li]some are professional laws.[/li][/ul] In my jurisdiction (as with most jurisdictions) ethical rules are part of the body of laws that apply to every licensed engineer. To breach an engineering law will lead to some sort of disciplinary action by your licensing body.

It should be obvious that if you are not a member of a defined group, then you are not subject to its laws. For example, I'm not bound by the sub-division / community regulations for a community a few miles down the road because I don't live there, nor am I bound by the rules of the buddist religion because I'm not a member.

The point is however, that I am a member of my provincial engineerig association / licensing body and therefore I am bound by all their engineering laws where ever I go, what ever I do and when ever I pracatice. Just like any visitor in a foreign country, I am bound by their laws, standards and especially their building practices.

Regards,

 

[VoyageofDiscovery]

Hi PM,

I do not think what you say with respect to your provincial engineering association is 100% true. The provincial association only has jurisdiction for the province it represents. Also legally speaking, laws and ethics have been recognized as separate by these very associations in Canada.

Regards

VOD

 

[PM]

VOD:

Your comments:

"The provincial association only has jurisdiction for the province it represents. Also legally speaking, laws and ethics have been recognized as separate by these very associations in Canada."

are not entirely accurate.

The laws of the Engineering licensing bodies that I have been registered with, govern my practice regardless whether I am practicing in Africa or Canada. Doubtless there are practical difficulties with bringing a complaint from such a distance, but jurisdiction knows no geographical limits. I suspect you may be confused with an association's jurisdiction over membership entrance eligibility. (ie. residency restrictions over eligibility for membership)

The Canons of Ethics, Code of Ethics, or whatever they are locally called, are part of the engineering law. They certainly are for all the provincial associations for which I have been a member. Also every licensing body that I've researched in the US and Canada also include their ethics rules as part of their engineering law. Most licensing bodies include engineering laws that regulate:[ul][li]unprofessional conduct (ie. mostly ethics issues)[/li][li]negligence or misconduct in duties of practice (ie. breaches of contract and tort duties)[/li][li]miscellaneous breaches of the engineering statutes / by-laws, and[/li][li]criminal conviction or discipline in another engineering jurisdiction.[/li][/ul]So if the question is whether an engineer can breach an engineering law in one jurisdiction and be immune from discipline in another jurisdiction, the general answer is no. How well the integration between engineering jurisdictions are in this regard is an open question. Many jurisdictions currently prefer not to prosecute violations elsewhere (ie. mostly for economic reasons), but their jurisdiction is certainly not in question.

Regards,

 

[RDK]

PM

I disagree with your last statement.

While I agree that the Code of Ethics is part of engineering law. (In Manitoba at least the law obliges all engineers to follow the rules and regulations of the Association, the Code of Ethics is one of these regulations.)

Where I disagree is your statement that you are legally obliged to follow the provincial laws everywhere you go. The only way that my actions in say the US or South America would be contrary to any Canadian law would be if the law specifically referred to actions by Canadians outside the country (Our laws on child sex, driver’s licenses and aviation for examples) or if the action impacted the Canadian jurisdiction in some way.

If I went to Europe and was unethical in the practice of engineering on a project that had no Canadian impact, the Manitoba Association could not touch me. (Unless they used the good moral character clause.)

My Errors and Omissions insurance company is another story.







Rick Kitson MBA P.Eng

Construction Project Management
From conception to completion

http://www.kitsonengineering.com

 

[PM]

RDK:

It may be difficult for many to swallow, but as long as you remain a member of the Manitoba association, you are subject to its laws. So if you are accused of an unprofessional or unethical act in Botswana, then your Manitoba association has jurisdiction to discipline you (if it chooses to).

As most lawyers know, all prosecutors have discretiion over what they choose to prosecute and what they do not. I doubt any jurisdiction has sufficient money to prosecute every infraction they become aware of, so priorities must be set. For example, in one association, they do not prosecute members who have been found guilty of criminal offenses (ranging from sexual assault to shop lifting).

Regards,

 

[VoyageofDiscovery]

Hi PM,

Getting back to the Code of Ethics you mention in Manitoba, each provincial association has slightly different powers. In Ontario, though much is covered under professional misconduct, the Code of Ethics strictly speaking, is NOT ENFORCEABLE under the ACT. Personally I see this as the Association recognizing that ethics issues are difficult to predict and as such leaves us with guidelines to follow as professionals to do the right thing. Subjective at best especially in grey areas like we are discussing.

Respectfully, PM, your view seems not to accommodate regional differences, even within Canada, and thus here in lies the problem.

Regards

VOD

 

[PSE]

It would appear that regardless of where you are licensed, registered or employed, performing engineering work as a result of NAFTA conveys an additional or supplemental layer of ethical conduct. How one would be able to determine if the work they just received was a result of or related to, NAFTA could be quite difficult. From my viewpoint, take a look at the most comprehensive ethical codes that you work with and follow them. That way you hopefully do not have to worry about "local" variations.

Regards

 

[PM]

VOD

From your Aug. 25th message you wrote:

". . .the Code of Ethics strictly speaking, is NOT ENFORCEABLE under the ACT."

There is not a single association in Canada that does not enforce its ethical rules and discipline its members under powers granted by their provincial engineering statute.

It is incredible that a member of PEO would argue the contrary. I suggest you should consult Ian Eng, P.Eng. PEO's Deputy Registrar, Complaints, Discipline and Enforcement for clarification on this.

Regards,

 

[VoyageofDiscovery]

Hi PM,

Now,now, don't be so quick to attack me. If you understood the entire sentence, you can see that I agree with the fact that the PEO does inforce ethics through "Professional Misconduct". However, strictly speaking the Code of Ethics under the Act is not enforceable. I know this sounds funny, but I was just trying to make a point that when it comes to ethics and the law, laws can be different even between provinces and enforcability of a wide variety of ethical dilemas may not be black and white.

This is a discussion group, I have read the Ontario Act, understood this part and presented it in this light to make a point. If you have read the Ontario Act and can point out my error please do so. However, please provide me with some respect as a P.Eng. and acknowledgement that ethics is a grey area in light of the subject of this thread. The world is larger that N. America.

Respectfully

VOD

 

[VoyageofDiscovery]

Hi PSE,

Let me pose a question to you,

How would you deal with this situation?

You are in charge of all financial approvals for a project. Your task is to build something in a far flung region. That foreign government hires your company to do much needed work to provide essential services to the region. Politics in the region are shaky but the government would like to make the project a reality.

The highest ranking government official tells you, off the record, that in order for the project to be completed he requires protection fees. If you do not provide this, he cannot provide much needed protection against the rebels, who have gunned down and killed all local construction workers on past similar jobs and will most definitely do it again.

Now if you do not provide these "fees", any of these types of deaths would be attributable to your decision. At least, you would bear some responsibility, but your conscience would probably bear all.

Would you walk away from the job? Does that prove you have "ethics" and are a decent person, when actually people really need the work done. It could be fresh water, a hospital for injured children, you get the drift. So by walking away, it actually hurts many people.

This is a very real situation that occurred and continues to occur.

Regards

VOD

 

[IFRs]

Go higher up the political or military ladder? If you do it out in the open at least you won't be "sneaking" around and feeling guilty.

 

[PSE]

VOD,

Interesting question. I would consider that being asked to provide "protection" fees to be in effect a bribe. Could I then trust this "highest ranking government official"? No. Giving in to this request does not mean that my employees would be safe against these "rebels".

I would look at using an independent professional security force and provide them with the knowledge that there may be conflict with "rebels" with all the potential assests of a military force. If the cost for this force added to the cost of the project is unpalatable to that foreign government, I would recommend to my company that it either walk away from the job or realize that it may be worth the short term financial loss if there is the potential of future profitable business after a regime change.

Regards

 

[VoyageofDiscovery]

Hi PSE,

I think you are stepping away from the issue and assuming that an "independant security force" would be welcome seeing that you would be denying their services.

If you walk away, well I guess another firm would get the work. But finally if that's the case can you really say that you or the other firm has acted unethically.

Regards

VOD

 

[VoyageofDiscovery]

Hi PSE,

oops, I meant to say:

But finally if that's the case can you really say that you acted ethically or the other firm has acted unethically.

Regards

VOD