what should be the line of action of the engineer? [on hold]
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}
up vote
-1
down vote
favorite
A client believes an engineer's designs are too costly,but the engineer fears that anything less may endanger the public.But the client insists on lowering the cost,what,in your opinion,should be the line of action of the engineer?
customer-relation
asked Nov 21 at 16:11
Huma Qaseem
286
New contributor
Huma Qaseem is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
put on hold as too broad by mxyzplk, Erik, IDrinkandIKnowThings, Dukeling, gnat Nov 21 at 21:27
Please edit the question to limit it to a specific problem with enough detail to identify an adequate answer. Avoid asking multiple distinct questions at once. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
add a comment |
up vote
-1
down vote
favorite
A client believes an engineer's designs are too costly,but the engineer fears that anything less may endanger the public.But the client insists on lowering the cost,what,in your opinion,should be the line of action of the engineer?
customer-relation
asked Nov 21 at 16:11
Huma Qaseem
286
New contributor
Huma Qaseem is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
put on hold as too broad by mxyzplk, Erik, IDrinkandIKnowThings, Dukeling, gnat Nov 21 at 21:27
Please edit the question to limit it to a specific problem with enough detail to identify an adequate answer. Avoid asking multiple distinct questions at once. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
What is the severity of "endanger the public"? Going cheap on bridge or building materials would be different from a pinch-point on a toy
– cdkMoose
Nov 21 at 16:20
1
What is the regulatory context? Is the engineer tasked with designing to any specific standard or code? Is there any external body that audits or approves the design? There really aren't anywhere near enough details to know how to answer this question.
– dwizum
Nov 21 at 16:24
If you can't compromise on quality, compromise on scope.
– rath
Nov 21 at 16:26
Could the engineer reasonably provide a risk analysis that shows/proves that the cost cutting measures materially impact safety (and would result in the need for $X additional insurance coverage, require $X additional maintenance or repair costs, etc?)
– Meg
Nov 21 at 16:54
What kind of engineer? What kind of 'endanger the public'? What legal jurisdiction? What legal and professional standards are entailed by the title 'engineer', in this case?
– AakashM
Nov 22 at 9:09
add a comment |
up vote
-1
down vote
favorite
up vote
-1
down vote
favorite
A client believes an engineer's designs are too costly,but the engineer fears that anything less may endanger the public.But the client insists on lowering the cost,what,in your opinion,should be the line of action of the engineer?
customer-relation
asked Nov 21 at 16:11
Huma Qaseem
286
New contributor
Huma Qaseem is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
A client believes an engineer's designs are too costly,but the engineer fears that anything less may endanger the public.But the client insists on lowering the cost,what,in your opinion,should be the line of action of the engineer?
customer-relation
customer-relation
asked Nov 21 at 16:11
Huma Qaseem
286
New contributor
Huma Qaseem is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked Nov 21 at 16:11
Huma Qaseem
286
New contributor
Huma Qaseem is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked Nov 21 at 16:11
Huma Qaseem
286
New contributor
Huma Qaseem is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked Nov 21 at 16:11
Huma Qaseem
286
asked Nov 21 at 16:11
Huma Qaseem
286
286
New contributor
Huma Qaseem is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Huma Qaseem is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Huma Qaseem is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
put on hold as too broad by mxyzplk, Erik, IDrinkandIKnowThings, Dukeling, gnat Nov 21 at 21:27
Please edit the question to limit it to a specific problem with enough detail to identify an adequate answer. Avoid asking multiple distinct questions at once. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
put on hold as too broad by mxyzplk, Erik, IDrinkandIKnowThings, Dukeling, gnat Nov 21 at 21:27
Please edit the question to limit it to a specific problem with enough detail to identify an adequate answer. Avoid asking multiple distinct questions at once. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
What is the severity of "endanger the public"? Going cheap on bridge or building materials would be different from a pinch-point on a toy
– cdkMoose
Nov 21 at 16:20
1
What is the regulatory context? Is the engineer tasked with designing to any specific standard or code? Is there any external body that audits or approves the design? There really aren't anywhere near enough details to know how to answer this question.
– dwizum
Nov 21 at 16:24
If you can't compromise on quality, compromise on scope.
– rath
Nov 21 at 16:26
Could the engineer reasonably provide a risk analysis that shows/proves that the cost cutting measures materially impact safety (and would result in the need for $X additional insurance coverage, require $X additional maintenance or repair costs, etc?)
– Meg
Nov 21 at 16:54
What kind of engineer? What kind of 'endanger the public'? What legal jurisdiction? What legal and professional standards are entailed by the title 'engineer', in this case?
– AakashM
Nov 22 at 9:09
add a comment |
What is the severity of "endanger the public"? Going cheap on bridge or building materials would be different from a pinch-point on a toy
– cdkMoose
Nov 21 at 16:20
1
What is the regulatory context? Is the engineer tasked with designing to any specific standard or code? Is there any external body that audits or approves the design? There really aren't anywhere near enough details to know how to answer this question.
– dwizum
Nov 21 at 16:24
If you can't compromise on quality, compromise on scope.
– rath
Nov 21 at 16:26
Could the engineer reasonably provide a risk analysis that shows/proves that the cost cutting measures materially impact safety (and would result in the need for $X additional insurance coverage, require $X additional maintenance or repair costs, etc?)
– Meg
Nov 21 at 16:54
What kind of engineer? What kind of 'endanger the public'? What legal jurisdiction? What legal and professional standards are entailed by the title 'engineer', in this case?
– AakashM
Nov 22 at 9:09
What is the severity of "endanger the public"? Going cheap on bridge or building materials would be different from a pinch-point on a toy
– cdkMoose
Nov 21 at 16:20
What is the severity of "endanger the public"? Going cheap on bridge or building materials would be different from a pinch-point on a toy
– cdkMoose
Nov 21 at 16:20
1
1
What is the regulatory context? Is the engineer tasked with designing to any specific standard or code? Is there any external body that audits or approves the design? There really aren't anywhere near enough details to know how to answer this question.
– dwizum
Nov 21 at 16:24
What is the regulatory context? Is the engineer tasked with designing to any specific standard or code? Is there any external body that audits or approves the design? There really aren't anywhere near enough details to know how to answer this question.
– dwizum
Nov 21 at 16:24
If you can't compromise on quality, compromise on scope.
– rath
Nov 21 at 16:26
If you can't compromise on quality, compromise on scope.
– rath
Nov 21 at 16:26
Could the engineer reasonably provide a risk analysis that shows/proves that the cost cutting measures materially impact safety (and would result in the need for $X additional insurance coverage, require $X additional maintenance or repair costs, etc?)
– Meg
Nov 21 at 16:54
Could the engineer reasonably provide a risk analysis that shows/proves that the cost cutting measures materially impact safety (and would result in the need for $X additional insurance coverage, require $X additional maintenance or repair costs, etc?)
– Meg
Nov 21 at 16:54
What kind of engineer? What kind of 'endanger the public'? What legal jurisdiction? What legal and professional standards are entailed by the title 'engineer', in this case?
– AakashM
Nov 22 at 9:09
What kind of engineer? What kind of 'endanger the public'? What legal jurisdiction? What legal and professional standards are entailed by the title 'engineer', in this case?
– AakashM
Nov 22 at 9:09
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
6
down vote
accepted
I work as a Mechanical Engineer for a large multinational and I have to tell you that in my company we take product safety very seriously. As an Engineer, you should do everything you can to try to accommodate the customer's requirements; however, if you come to the conclusion that it is simply not possible to reduce the price further without compromising the safety of the product, then you and/or your company should simply decline to provide the product.
If you are forced to choose between making a sale and product safety, you should always choose safety. Firstly, that is the ethical thing to do. Secondly, you and/or your company will be liable for the safety of a product that you sell, not your customer. If you sell a product that is inherently not safe, then you and/or the company will be taking on liability for that and if anyone is injured (or worse), then it can result in lawsuits coming back to you, which may result in the company making a loss on the product overall anyway. Besides that, there is the risk of damage to the company reputation from putting out an unsafe product. Once reputation has been damaged, it can be very difficult to recover, and that can also be very costly, from a longer-term perspective.
In summary: don't provide a product that you know is unsafe. Just don't do it - the risks are too large.
answered Nov 21 at 16:53
Time4Tea
2,94331027
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
- List out everything you considered and why you think it is not safe.
- Review your report with a pier.
- Talk to your boss.
answered Nov 21 at 18:55
paparazzo
35k761112
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
6
down vote
accepted
I work as a Mechanical Engineer for a large multinational and I have to tell you that in my company we take product safety very seriously. As an Engineer, you should do everything you can to try to accommodate the customer's requirements; however, if you come to the conclusion that it is simply not possible to reduce the price further without compromising the safety of the product, then you and/or your company should simply decline to provide the product.
If you are forced to choose between making a sale and product safety, you should always choose safety. Firstly, that is the ethical thing to do. Secondly, you and/or your company will be liable for the safety of a product that you sell, not your customer. If you sell a product that is inherently not safe, then you and/or the company will be taking on liability for that and if anyone is injured (or worse), then it can result in lawsuits coming back to you, which may result in the company making a loss on the product overall anyway. Besides that, there is the risk of damage to the company reputation from putting out an unsafe product. Once reputation has been damaged, it can be very difficult to recover, and that can also be very costly, from a longer-term perspective.
In summary: don't provide a product that you know is unsafe. Just don't do it - the risks are too large.
answered Nov 21 at 16:53
Time4Tea
2,94331027
add a comment |
up vote
6
down vote
accepted
I work as a Mechanical Engineer for a large multinational and I have to tell you that in my company we take product safety very seriously. As an Engineer, you should do everything you can to try to accommodate the customer's requirements; however, if you come to the conclusion that it is simply not possible to reduce the price further without compromising the safety of the product, then you and/or your company should simply decline to provide the product.
If you are forced to choose between making a sale and product safety, you should always choose safety. Firstly, that is the ethical thing to do. Secondly, you and/or your company will be liable for the safety of a product that you sell, not your customer. If you sell a product that is inherently not safe, then you and/or the company will be taking on liability for that and if anyone is injured (or worse), then it can result in lawsuits coming back to you, which may result in the company making a loss on the product overall anyway. Besides that, there is the risk of damage to the company reputation from putting out an unsafe product. Once reputation has been damaged, it can be very difficult to recover, and that can also be very costly, from a longer-term perspective.
In summary: don't provide a product that you know is unsafe. Just don't do it - the risks are too large.
answered Nov 21 at 16:53
Time4Tea
2,94331027
add a comment |
up vote
6
down vote
accepted
up vote
6
down vote
accepted
I work as a Mechanical Engineer for a large multinational and I have to tell you that in my company we take product safety very seriously. As an Engineer, you should do everything you can to try to accommodate the customer's requirements; however, if you come to the conclusion that it is simply not possible to reduce the price further without compromising the safety of the product, then you and/or your company should simply decline to provide the product.
If you are forced to choose between making a sale and product safety, you should always choose safety. Firstly, that is the ethical thing to do. Secondly, you and/or your company will be liable for the safety of a product that you sell, not your customer. If you sell a product that is inherently not safe, then you and/or the company will be taking on liability for that and if anyone is injured (or worse), then it can result in lawsuits coming back to you, which may result in the company making a loss on the product overall anyway. Besides that, there is the risk of damage to the company reputation from putting out an unsafe product. Once reputation has been damaged, it can be very difficult to recover, and that can also be very costly, from a longer-term perspective.
In summary: don't provide a product that you know is unsafe. Just don't do it - the risks are too large.
answered Nov 21 at 16:53
Time4Tea
2,94331027
I work as a Mechanical Engineer for a large multinational and I have to tell you that in my company we take product safety very seriously. As an Engineer, you should do everything you can to try to accommodate the customer's requirements; however, if you come to the conclusion that it is simply not possible to reduce the price further without compromising the safety of the product, then you and/or your company should simply decline to provide the product.
If you are forced to choose between making a sale and product safety, you should always choose safety. Firstly, that is the ethical thing to do. Secondly, you and/or your company will be liable for the safety of a product that you sell, not your customer. If you sell a product that is inherently not safe, then you and/or the company will be taking on liability for that and if anyone is injured (or worse), then it can result in lawsuits coming back to you, which may result in the company making a loss on the product overall anyway. Besides that, there is the risk of damage to the company reputation from putting out an unsafe product. Once reputation has been damaged, it can be very difficult to recover, and that can also be very costly, from a longer-term perspective.
In summary: don't provide a product that you know is unsafe. Just don't do it - the risks are too large.
answered Nov 21 at 16:53
Time4Tea
2,94331027
answered Nov 21 at 16:53
Time4Tea
2,94331027
answered Nov 21 at 16:53
Time4Tea
2,94331027
answered Nov 21 at 16:53
Time4Tea
2,94331027
2,94331027
add a comment |
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
- List out everything you considered and why you think it is not safe.
- Review your report with a pier.
- Talk to your boss.
answered Nov 21 at 18:55
paparazzo
35k761112
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
- List out everything you considered and why you think it is not safe.
- Review your report with a pier.
- Talk to your boss.
answered Nov 21 at 18:55
paparazzo
35k761112
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
- List out everything you considered and why you think it is not safe.
- Review your report with a pier.
- Talk to your boss.
answered Nov 21 at 18:55
paparazzo
35k761112
- List out everything you considered and why you think it is not safe.
- Review your report with a pier.
- Talk to your boss.
answered Nov 21 at 18:55
paparazzo
35k761112
answered Nov 21 at 18:55
paparazzo
35k761112
answered Nov 21 at 18:55
paparazzo
35k761112
answered Nov 21 at 18:55
paparazzo
35k761112
35k761112
add a comment |
add a comment |
What is the severity of "endanger the public"? Going cheap on bridge or building materials would be different from a pinch-point on a toy
– cdkMoose
Nov 21 at 16:20
1
What is the regulatory context? Is the engineer tasked with designing to any specific standard or code? Is there any external body that audits or approves the design? There really aren't anywhere near enough details to know how to answer this question.
– dwizum
Nov 21 at 16:24
If you can't compromise on quality, compromise on scope.
– rath
Nov 21 at 16:26
Could the engineer reasonably provide a risk analysis that shows/proves that the cost cutting measures materially impact safety (and would result in the need for $X additional insurance coverage, require $X additional maintenance or repair costs, etc?)
– Meg
Nov 21 at 16:54
What kind of engineer? What kind of 'endanger the public'? What legal jurisdiction? What legal and professional standards are entailed by the title 'engineer', in this case?
– AakashM
Nov 22 at 9:09