One of the foremost engineering fundamental cannon states that “Engineers shall hold paramount the safety, health and welfare of the public in the performance of their professional duties” (Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology par. 1). LeMessurier adhered to the fundamental cannon of engineering ethics. His decision to accept the flaw in design and the subsequent efforts to correct the problem was widely informed by the desire to uphold the public’s safety and welfare. The engineer was confronted with the dilemma of whether or not to disclose the flaw that could consequently destroy his reputation and create a financial liability. Despite the possible negative business and professional implications, LeMessurier decision considered the ultimate public safety and health. An undergraduate student, who relatively may be considered a novice by an arrogant professional, discovered the flaws and brought it to the attention of LeMessurier (Kremer 260).Despite the fact that LeMessurier was in denial when the matter was raised, he took some time to think about it in detail (Nye par. 7). It demonstrates that the engineer was respectful to the professional opinions of other engineers. He acted in a manner that upheld and enhanced the honour, dignity, and integrity of the engineering profession. To be ethical, it is essential for a professional to accept mistakes and identify strategies of rectifying them to promote the safety of the public.
Ideally, the engineer could have ignored the concerns raised by the undergraduate student to avoid negative professional judgement (Kremer 263). According to Kremer, it is important for engineers to avoid situations that put their professional conduct into disrepute. However, the nature of the Citicorp Tower engineering flaw dictated that the Chief Engineer reveals the personal professional misjudgement. The situation tested LeMessurier ‘s professional ethics. Accordingly, the situation required reconciliation of the Chief engineer’s contractual obligation to Citicorp with the moral obligation to uphold public safety. It is apparent that the structural flaw of the building was a professional neglect to the client with adverse financial liability. Furthermore, it exposed the public to unprecedented danger. The engineer’s decisions to notify the owners of the building of the impending danger as well as his commitment to rectify the problem reconcile both the client contractual obligations and public safety concerns (Kremer 278).
Despite the fact that LeMessurier admitted the engineering flaw and took steps to rectify the problem, the public was deliberately kept in darkness about the potential danger. The chief engineer and Citicorp ensured that the information was a well-guarded secret until recently. Given the magnitude of the danger the building posed to the safety and health of the public during a period when strong storms were approaching, it would have been ethical to disclose the information to the public (Kremer 267). The justification given by LeMessurier for concealing the information from the public domain defeats the tenets of engineering ethics. Indeed, it translates to a self-preserving attempt to avoid public scrutiny and criticism. According to the NSPE Board of Ethical Review, even though it is desirable to withhold information to avoid public panic, there is no justification for doing so for long periods of time, especially when the health and safety of the public is compromised for an extended duration (Kremer 269).
Overall, LeMessurier actions are consistent with the fundamental cannons of engineering ethics. The engineer risked destroying his professional reputation and incurring financial liabilities by reporting and correcting the engineering flaw in the CiticorpTower. However, he failed to uphold the ethical standard by withholding crucial safety information from the public for a reasonably long period.
Works Cited
Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology. Code of Ethics of Engineers. 1977.
Kremer, Eugene. “Re-Examining The Citicorp Case: Ethical Paragon Or Chimera” Cross Currents, 2002, Vol. 52, No. 3.
Nye, James. “The New York disaster that never happened: How one phone call from an architecture STUDENT saved the 915ft Citigroup skyscraper from crashing onto Manhattan during a hurricane.” The Daily Mail. April 20, 2014. Web. February 29, 2016.
