moonlighting and ethics 14

[oceana1234]

First the background....EIT with solid autocad drafting skills.

Btw, I still have to study and take the ethics exam which is why I'm asking the question here.
So be kind, please....

I used to do occasional moonlighting when I was a draftperson/technician. Drafting in other disciplines not related to the job. Out of curiosity, how many people here have moonlighted? Does it cause you any conflicts?
It seems like a common practice even though most places specify that they do not allow moonlighting. I have never seen enforcement of this rule.

So, I been asked to do some drafting for an engineer. He used to work at my current place of employment.
The project is in another jurisdiction, where chicken wire solutions seem to be the order of the day....
sorry I'm being a little glib here.

This involves doing some shop drawings which he will approve as part of one of his projects.
He claims that there is no conflict of interest for him.
Isn't the manufacturer responsible for the design of the piece of work?
Doesn't production and signing of said "shop drawings" represent a conflict of interest or more to the point
a liability problem for the project design engineer?

I was provided with sample drawings of what was expected and the current design drawings.

When we met, I mentioned that I would only be providing him with a preliminary and that he would obviously have to
revise, since I was providing him with drafting work and not doing design work. This type of design work is outside of my expertise.

After a preliminary review of shop drawings samples with the associated project drawings, I cannot feel confident as to certain dimensions and connection details for the work. These would obviously be part of the manufacturer's expertise.

I really feel uncomfortable doing this side contract. I feel obligated, because I said I do it, plus he's an experienced engineer and I would call him a friend and definite possible reference

Now, that I am an EIT, am I exposing myself to any future problems?

Any advice on how to handle the situation? How do I get out of it?

 

[GregLocock]

Sounds a bit pie in the sky to me. How do you excel at home if you regularly devote more than the 40 hours a week to work? By definition you have to be at home to be a part of it.

It may be that I am more cynical, having worked as a paid by the hour contractor, but I am very conscious that my employer is buying the hours of my life that I can find better things to do with. I'm not talking so much about the work stuff (which I enjoy very much), as meetings, and crunches, and pointless training in acronym ridden systems that have a half life of two years.

Cheers

Greg Locock

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

 

[buzzp]

UNLengineer,
Yes you read me totally wrong. My frustration is with the almighty on here who are obviously company men with no life. The comment about NOT going to work tired was not made by me, it was made by one of the almighty. You should reread the threads. You should be arguing with them if you think its okay to goto work once in a while tired.
I to try my hardest at work. However, I am not one to donate my time just because I want to make brownie points. I will work beyond the 40 hrs on occasions where things are in crunch. But when I have to take the kid to the doctor or something, then they better not expect me to deduct this time.
If they do, gone are freebies. If your work is more important then your family, then I feel for you. If you want to donate time to your employer all the time, then have at it, just don't expect everyone too. An employer gets the same treatment from me as I get from them. If treatments is great, then good, they will get more freebies from me, if they blanket their no moonlighting policy and I have a good prospect in a way to make some extra bucks and it don't interfere with them or their clients, then I will do it. I am not going to sacrifice my personal gain, to satisfy their unwarranted concerns with me moonlighting. Notice the term 'unwarranted'.

 

[UNLengineer]

Sorry Buzzp for kind of going off the deep end like that. My response definitely was a little to idealistic, but I am dealing with one of my coworkers right now who is starting up a business on the side. He spends all his time doing his side job, and nothing I need done can get done. But nobody above me wants to admit it until the project gets behind schedule. Talk about frustrating. Anyways, I am very much like you, work longer when needed but expect leeway for doctors appointments and such.

 

[ziggi]

hear, hear, buzzp

 

[IRstuff]

The original posts about tiredness was not talking about an occasional or even weekly, late-night softball game:

If outside work adversely affect your job performance, and you are collecting the same paycheck, you are shortchanging your employer. Sleeping during normal work hours due to fatigue from working 7PM to 2AM on side work at home definitely is unethical.

TTFN

 

[buzzp]

Here is the first mention of being tired by whyun:
"Being too tired to work efficiently at your primary work due to long hours of moonlighting is unethical."

The first reply about this was from UcfSE:
"whyun - Would my actions be unethical if I were too tired due to studying late, or playing or anything else, or is it just if I were too tired because I was working elsewhere to support my family?"

UNLengineer said:
"Although your employer is not #1 in your life, you are being paid to be productive while at work. Whether you are tired from moonlighting or antyhing else, you are stealing time from your employer."

Then I said, "Boy, now I can't go to work tired because I may not be as productive regardless of why I am tired? I want you guys to work for me. I find it hard to believe that anyone would give there employer such consideration. Tell your friends you have leave your softball game early to make sure your productive at work tomorrow. Now thats being dedicated. Fortunately, I have a life outside of work and don't intend to think about work 24hrs a day and the affect my actions may have on my employer (at least not about being tired for work tomorrow). "

Then the heat was on me. So no, the original tiredness post did not mention being occasionally unprodcutive. However, all the posts after that made it sound like at no time should you do anything in the evening to jeopordize your productivity the next day.

 

[cadnutcase]

UNLengineer, if I had somebody doing what your employee is doing on my clock, they would be gone without blinking an eye. I don't understand how your superiors can put up with it.

I put in my terms of contract at my new employer that I would be doing moonlighting work in certain industries and even with certain companies to allow them to investigate the work in neccessary. In there I also wrote out that it would never be on their time. Nobody blinked an eye.

One time I was at lunch with my boss and he got a phone call. While he was on the phone I got a call and made a couple of more calls and made a month's pay while he was on the phone, in less than 5 minutes. He asked me what the call was about and I explained it to him, he laughed and asked me how often I do that. I told him not near enough to quit my day job. He got the idea.

 

[BJC]

buzzp
You have touched upon a good point. What is productivity for engineers? If and engineer is being paid to produce so many reports per day, so many square feet of drawings, or what ever quanative measurement you can think of is he/she really doing engineering work?
Engineer and Ingenious are variations of the same word. If your setting at your desk with a cup of coffee does that preclude you from having a brainstorm that might pay your salary for a month? Can you have a good ideal if your tired? hungry? If your moonlighting and have a great ideal for you "day" job should you impliment it the next morning or pretend it didn't happen?
Managers that operate like they are running some 19 th centruy coal mine are loosing a lot. They kill a lot of creativity and inititive. Engineering is solving problems most of us can't put them down when we go out the door. Those flashs of insight and inspiration can happen anywhere.
Lots of engineers "work 24/7" insisting that they be setting wide awake in a chair at location X doesn't equate to productivity.

 

[EddyC]

BJC,

I can really relate to your comment about: "Managers running their office like a 19th century coal mine". I've been in a few companies that are run this way. I find it peculiar that intelligent people choose to count the pennies that they can see rather than the dollars that they can't see, but intellectually know exist. One could certainly expect pennywise/dollar foolish behavior from the less intelligent, but it really surprises me to see it from engineer managers.

 

[IRstuff]

Sure, but do you really expect a chronically tired person to be as creative as a well-rested person?

TTFN

 

[ziggi]

IRstuff,
with regards to creativity, I've had friends in architecture, interior design, music and arts who have had 24 hour days (ie. without sleep) and still create something great.
My wife lived off a few hours of sleep a night and still helped to create a movie (the director had even less sleep than her).

I guess it just depends on how motivated you are, a bored engineer on 8 hours sleep will produce lower quality work than a happy and motivated one will on 5 hours sleep, I know b/c I've been in both situations.

As for taking work home with me, that only happens when I actually like the work and when I actually care for the work....once again I've been in both situations (ie. thinking about work at home and not)

 

[IRstuff]

That's anecdotal and doesn't necessarily prove anything. These people might be ten times more creative if they were well rested. All it proves is that these people are serious procrastinators.

Tired people make mistakes; that's a fact. Doctor's make mistakes when they're tired. The twenty people they do manage to keep alive can be quickly offset by the one person that dies because of a doctor's fatigue.

TTFN

 

[whyun]

Though there are exceptions, generally people perform their best when well rested.

From the employer's perspective, they can maximize their profits when their employees produce the most in shortest amount of time possible. Being tired on occasion shouldn't be grounds for laying someone off but being tires all the time because you've been working all night on moonlighting work can surely p*ss off your boss.

I totally agree with JAE about litigation resulting from moonlighting work. A company can be totally exposed to the liability from an employee's moonlight job.

We all make a living. If we need more to survive, moonlighting definitely can be a good thing. But before pursuing that, first, find out about the moonlighting policy from your company, discuss whether there are any conflicts of interest between ANY parties involved, sign any legal documents releasing your employer from any litigation resulting from moonlight work, agree on approximate extent of moonlight work (hours per day or week...) When everyone is happy, then go for it.

 

[ziggi]

IRstuff,
First off, a sample size of more than 5 is not necessarily anecdotal.
Secondly, how sure are you about your facts, your doctor story suggests that you are basing it on the media (perhaps) story that covers the single solitary screw up, in 21 people, the doctor made while being tired, is it possible that the doctor could have easily made the same screw up if wide awake, and working on 21 people?

My point, while I agree that in general tired people make more mistakes, generalisations rarely accurately portray the individual due to the complexity of factors involved.

 

[Beggar]

Of course people are at their best when they're well rested, exercising, eating properly, and not stressed.

Enlightened companies recognize this and provide things such as work-out facilities, etc. Others do not.

If my performance is unsatisfactory, they'll toss me. Otherwise, it's none of the company's business what I do when I'm outside of work.

Sometimes I greatly exceed the requirements of my job; other times I fall short. In the aggregate, though, I must be doing OK or I'd be out. Right?

Some of the attitudes put forth here are simply amazing. I hope your loyalty is rewarded...

--------------------
Bring back the HP-15

http://www.hp15c.org

--------------------

 

[RDK]

Being an engineering manager I’d argue that point.

Engineering requires a very linear thinking pattern. We think in terms of IF.. THEN..ELSE thought processes.

Managers have a more organic type of thinking process where a wide variety of influences come to play and the outcome is not always predictable for the same inputs.

Also engineering thinking usually has a very clear goal that is known and understood by all and the limitations on the end result are more physical properties of material and structure than based on human behaviors.. The building shall not fall down.

Managers often have hidden agendas that do not depend on physical properties but on the best financial outcome for themselves (not always their employer) If the building falls down how can I blame someone else and show that if they had only followed my advice (while not really giving any real advice other than to design and build it so that it doesn’t fall down) the building would have stood for many years.

Sometimes the best way to avoid any blame for anything is to put a stop to any productive work. The building did not fall down because I stopped them from building it wrong so I saved the building by not building it.

Also a manager is expected to be fully knowledgeable about all thinks, engineering, contracts, business, finance marketing etc. An engineer is usually not to concerned about admitting ignorance in areas outside their field and deferring to someone who knows. Most civil engineers I know let the electrical engineers design the wiring.

The result can be seen as illogical from an engineering perspective but are logical when analyzed in terms of the managerial constraints and goals.

Of course the best managers make sure that the building gets built, does not fall down and will meet the need of the users for the design life of the structure. This requires not only being able to think like an engineer and to respect the physics of the structure but the managerial concerns of people who failed high school physics and have simply no understanding of design.


Rick Kitson MBA P.Eng

Construction Project Management
From conception to completion

http://www.kitsonengineering.com

 

[BJC]

RDK being a manager I'll add to your point.
I can buy everything I need to start an engineering firm this afternoon at office depot. Unlike a lot of businesses the primary asset of an engineering company are people not things or capitol equipment.
A coal mine may have assets of 9 billion tons of unmined coal, it theirfore is managed differently that a service company.
A common problem with "engineering managers" is in their technical training. They deal with science where all things can be known and are predictable. People don't work that way. Some managers manage like they were on a Vulcan star ship and get frustrated when the people don't behave logically like good Vulcans. These managers are frustrating to work for and sometimes fun to watch. Management skills are people skills and some never learn them.

Irstuff. Chronically tired and stressed people have done lots of creative things. History is resplendant with examples. There are lots of examples of well rested, wide awake people who do nothing significant daya after day. Creative people are hard to manage because the first thing you have to do is admit that they may be smarter than you and may do things you can't.

 

[buzzp]

I am glad some of you came out of the woodwork. I was beginning to wonder if I was the only with this viewpoint! I feel better now about humankinds future; my visions of human company robots has vanished.

 

[HgTX]

My work would get a lot more out of me if they let me work during the hours that my body felt like being awake (3rd shift), but they won't.

They get a lot out of me anyway--my job used to be done by three other (well-rested) people.

I like to think of it as a "burn and coast" style of productivity.

Hg

Eng-Tips policies: faq731-376

 

[Beggar]

"burn and coast" -- I like that.

My work would get more out of me if they would provide a cool, quiet room with a cot and permit me a 2-hr siesta in the middle of the day -- they don't.

For that matter, they'd get more out of me by sending my business class rather than cattle class -- they don't.

For as long as they think that I'm worth what I cost, they'll pay me. The moment that they decide that I can be replaced by somebody cheaper, I'm gone.

If they would like to sign (and fund through escrow) a long-term, guaranteed employment contract, I'd be willing to give them say over more of my life -- for now, they get what they pay for, plus another 15% to cover for my preventable inefficiencies.

--------------------
How much do YOU owe?

http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/

--------------------