Case 61-4

Association with Nonregistered Engineers

Code Citations: [C11] [C19] [C23] [C27] [C28] [R27:53] [R28:54] [R28:55] [R29:61] [R8:15]

Case Citations: NONE

Facts:

Two individuals, Businessman A and Businessman B, neither of whom is a registered professional engineer, are in the process of forming a firm (partnership) to engage in engineering work-(consulting, surveying, and estimating). One of these men, Businessman A, is a graduate engineer who has been in the construction field for many years. Businessman A and Businessman B obtain a job and engage the services of a registered engineer, Engineer X, to perform and certify certain phases of the work connected with this particular job.

Engineer X is a full-time staff member of a state university and engages in outside work of this nature only on a spare time basis. Businessman A and Businessman B explain their situation to Engineer X and tell him that as soon as the firm is established another registered engineer, Engineer Z, is to be employed on a full-time basis and that Engineer X's services would be required only until that time.

During this interim period, Businessman A and Businessman B complete the legal requirements for the formulation of their partnership, the firm is established, an office rented, and cards printed advertising the firm as engaging in civil engineering, surveying, and estimating work.

Engineer Z for some reason does not go to work for the newly formed company and Engineer X is the only registered engineers connected with the firm. His employment, however, is still on a part-time basis and since he lives and works in a city some distance from the firm's place of business, he can exercise no immediate control or direction over the practices and work done by the other members of the new engineering company. Engineer X learns of Engineer Z's decision not to join the new company, but he continues his association with it anyway.

According to the applicable state law, if a firm engages in the practice of professional engineering in the state at least one member or employee of the firm must be a registered professional engineer and all work done by the firm shall be carried on under his immediate responsible direction.

Question:

Was Engineer X ethical to continue his association with the new company, after learning that Engineer Z would not be accepting employment?

References:

Code C11

"He will guard against conditions that are dangerous or threatening to life, limb or property on work for which he is responsible, or if he is not responsible, will promptly call such conditions to the attention of those who are responsible."

Code C19

"The engineer will endeavor to protect the engineering profession collectively and individually from misrepresentation and misunderstanding."

Code C23

"He will not directly or indirectly injure the professional reputation, prospects or practice of another engineer. However, if he considers that an engineer is guilty of unethical, illegal or unfair practice, he will present the information to the proper authority for action."

Code C27

"He will not use the advantages of a salaried position to compete unfairly with another engineer."

Code C28

"He will not become associated in responsibility for work with engineers who do not conform to ethical practices."

Code R8:15

"He will associate himself only with projects of a legitimate character."

Code R27:53

"An engineer will not use equipment, supplies, laboratory, or office facilities of his employer to carry on outside private practice without consent."

Code R28:54

"He will conform with registration laws in his practice of engineering."

Code R28:55

"He will not use association with a non-engineer, a corporation, or partnership, as a 'cloak' for unethical acts; but must accept personal responsibility for his professional acts."

Code R29:61

"Any firm offering engineering services must, in conformance with the laws of the state in which it operates, have its operations under the direction and responsibility of registered professional engineers."

Discussion:

This case obviously raises legal questions beyond the competence or jurisdiction of this body. The professional engineers involved in it should note, however, their duty under Code C23 to advise the proper authorities of any suspected illegal conduct.

Aside from the legal implications stated in the facts, there are evident serious questions of ethical conduct on the part of the registered engineers. Code C27 and Code R27:53 authorize the kind of part-time arrangement undertaken by registered engineers, subject to the stated restrictions. The facts do not indicate any violations of these conditions, and it is assumed that Engineer X would perform engineering services within the bounds of the limitations stated in the Canons and Rules.

Engineer X was retained on a part-time basis for only certain phases of one specific project and it does not appear that his name was used in the name of the firm, or otherwise listed in connection with the firm. Nevertheless, Engineer X is associated with the firm to some extent and his status as a registered engineer might be cited by the firm in discussions with clients or prospective clients, leaving the impression that the firm is operating under the direction of and with the services of registered engineers. Such a representation would place Engineer X in an awkward position . And deceive the public, the client or prospective clients, inasmuch as it is stated in the facts that Engineer X is not in a position to exercise the direction of engineering activities of the firm as required by the state law.

Under these circumstances we believe that there would be a violation of Code R29:61. As a result, there is a violation of Code R28:54 and Code R28:55 by Engineer X. Further, Engineer X is "associated" with a venture which is of questionable legality and therefore he runs afoul of Code R8:15 in continuing any type of affiliation or connection with the firm. Engineer X may be charged with a violation of Code C11 should the firm perform engineering services which endanger the public safety, even though not associated with the particular project, inasmuch as there is an implied threat to the public safety in the performance of engineering services by nonregistered engineers. It becomes the duty of Engineer X to notify proper authorities that the firm might perform engineering services without the direction of a registered engineer. Under these conditions the engineering profession is exposed to misrepresentation and misunderstanding and Engineer X must take appropriate action to protect the profession from these conditions, as stated in Code C19. Finally, Code C28 requires that registered engineers avoid any form of association with engineers who do not conform to ethical practices. There is more than sufficient evidence in the facts known to Engineer X to raise a substantial question as to the ethical standards of the firm, to say nothing of its apparent illegal operation.

Conclusion:

Engineer X was not ethical in continuing his association with the new company, after learning that Engineer Z would not be accepting employment. As soon as it became apparent that the firm was practicing without the services of a full-time registered engineer directly responsible for the engineering work, Engineer X was ethically obligated to withdraw his association with the firm and advise the proper state authorities of the facts of the situation. Engineer X may ethically perform part-time engineering services for ethically-operated firms under the conditions and restrictions stated in the Canons and the Rules.

Board of Ethical Review

L. R. DURKEE, P. E., PHIL T. ELLIOTT, P. E., A. C. KIRKWOOD, P. E., MARVIN C. NICHOLS, P. E., EZRA K. NICHOLSON, P. E., WYLIE W. GILLESPIE, P. E., PIERCE G. ELLIS, P. E. Chairman