In the case study of Gilbane Gold, David Jackson, the engineer responsible for waste treatment in Z-Corp, was put in a very difficult situation. In the beginning, David was getting results from Frank’s waste water discharge tanks that showed that they have been releasing arsenic and lead at higher levels than what the city allows. The waste water ends up into the popular and profitable sludge product called Gilbane Gold. Gilbane Gold is sold as a fertilizer to farmers for about 75 years. David mentions his concern of this in the monthly meeting. Frank Ceders, the engineering manager of Z-Corp, Diane Collins, the vice president of the facility, and Phil Port, the manager of the Z-Corp Gilbane Plant and David’s boss were all in that monthly meeting.
…show more content…
All his actions were within proper engineering decision (PED). According to the text in pg. 173, PED decisions involve “technical matters that require engineering expertise or falls within the ethical standards embodied in engineering codes, especially those that require engineers to protect the health and safety of the public.” Also, his actions followed the NSPE Code of Ethics which states, “Engineers shall hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public.” Also, the code mentions “if engineers’ judgment is overruled under circumstances that endanger life or property, they shall notify their employer or client and such other authority as may be appropriate.” He knew that arsenic and lead were poisonous, and these getting into Gilbane Gold will affect the health of a substantial amount of people since it is the most popular fertilizer for farmers. He went through all the important officials in Z-Corp about the situation. Only Tom Richards, an independent water treatment engineer and consultant of Z-Corp, tried to help with this problem but later got fired. He even talked to Diane Collins, the vice president of Z-Corp, but she denied his request since the company never heard from the waste water department and was under city regulations. However, the old test was not accurate which is why they might not have been contacted by the waste water department. David knew the real data and it showed levels of …show more content…
Within the text, Richard DeGeorge states that whistleblowing is morally permissible under three circumstances. Firstly, the harm that will be done to the public is serious and considerable. This was met when the poisonous arsenic and lead will be in Gilbane Gold if it is not deal with at the water treatment plant. Therefore, it will get into farms and then into many people’s food. Secondly, the employees report their concern to their superiors. This was met when David discuss this with his superiors, like Diane and Phil, about the situation. Thirdly, they exhaust the channels available within their organization after getting no satisfaction from their superiors. This was met when Diane and Phil denied David’s request of upgrading the water treatment plant when he heard of the anticipated growth in production and had no one else to go to. Under these circumstances, whistleblowing is morally
All his actions were within proper engineering decision (PED). According to the text in pg. 173, PED decisions involve “technical matters that require engineering expertise or falls within the ethical standards embodied in engineering codes, especially those that require engineers to protect the health and safety of the public.” Also, his actions followed the NSPE Code of Ethics which states, “Engineers shall hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public.” Also, the code mentions “if engineers’ judgment is overruled under circumstances that endanger life or property, they shall notify their employer or client and such other authority as may be appropriate.” He knew that arsenic and lead were poisonous, and these getting into Gilbane Gold will affect the health of a substantial amount of people since it is the most popular fertilizer for farmers. He went through all the important officials in Z-Corp about the situation. Only Tom Richards, an independent water treatment engineer and consultant of Z-Corp, tried to help with this problem but later got fired. He even talked to Diane Collins, the vice president of Z-Corp, but she denied his request since the company never heard from the waste water department and was under city regulations. However, the old test was not accurate which is why they might not have been contacted by the waste water department. David knew the real data and it showed levels of …show more content…
Within the text, Richard DeGeorge states that whistleblowing is morally permissible under three circumstances. Firstly, the harm that will be done to the public is serious and considerable. This was met when the poisonous arsenic and lead will be in Gilbane Gold if it is not deal with at the water treatment plant. Therefore, it will get into farms and then into many people’s food. Secondly, the employees report their concern to their superiors. This was met when David discuss this with his superiors, like Diane and Phil, about the situation. Thirdly, they exhaust the channels available within their organization after getting no satisfaction from their superiors. This was met when Diane and Phil denied David’s request of upgrading the water treatment plant when he heard of the anticipated growth in production and had no one else to go to. Under these circumstances, whistleblowing is morally