Engineering (or Professional) Ethics is a central part of the engineering profession. A social contract exists between the engineer and the general public. In exchange for the freedom to police our own members, the right to formulate technical standards and the benefit of financial support for engineering education, engineers are expected to look out for the welfare of society in technical decisions and behave in an acceptable professional manner.
During the 2nd ethics session in ME176 lab, you watched a videotape of an ethics case called Gilbane Gold, and then responded to some questions about the case. For the final ethics assignment for the class, your ethics team should now perform an ethical analysis of the Gilbane Gold situation using the Engineering Ethics Decision Matrix (section 1.10 of Exploring Engineering) as a tool in your analysis. Your team should do the following:
§ Provide an appropriate introduction that summarizes the Gilbane case thoroughly and accurately (use the in-class discussion to guide you)
§ Complete an Ethics Decision Matrix for the Gilbane case
§ Evaluate the ethical merits of the given case based on the Ethics Decision Matrix, and clearly state what your team would do if you were David Jackson and were placed in his situation at the end of the video. You should more completely answer the final question from the in-class review document that the entire class discussed.
; provide a professional cover memo as well as the responses to the above bulleted topics..
Ethics II In-class Review
State all of what your group believes are the relevant and unquestionable facts for this case? Explain why they are facts that everyone would agree upon, and not just your personal opinions:
Does your group think that Z Corp is really “poisoning” the Gilbane Gold soil? Be sure to explain why or why not; clearly indicate what “poisoning” means.
Is the town of Gilbane treating Z Corp fairly or unfairly? Does fair vs. unfair treatment change the way you should make ethical judgment or decisions?
Discuss what advice David was given by his colleagues (the ex-consultant Tom Richards and the college professor Winslow Massin), and how this might help or also hurt David’s ability to decide what to do?
Now that he has to meet the Z Corp lawyers in the morning, what are David’s possible (realistic) options at his meeting the next day (list at least three that cover the range possible)?