DP5

DecisionPoint
http://proethica.org/ontology/cases#DecisionPoint

DP5

Should the construction contractor independently verify Engineer B's structural engineering qualifications before retention, or rely on Engineer B's PE license as sufficient evidence of competence for the structural footing assignment?

The construction contractor must decide whether to verify Engineer B's domain-specific qualifications — including academic degree discipline and relevant structural engineering experience — before retaining him for the sole and exclusive purpose of structural footing design, or to rely on Engineer B's general PE license as sufficient qualification for the assignment. The tension is between the contractor's independent degree-to-task alignment verification obligation and the engineering profession's primary self-policing norm, which places the competence gatekeeping burden on engineers themselves rather than on clients.

Independently investigate Engineer B's academic degree discipline and documented structural engineering experience before finalizing the retention, requiring evidence of domain-specific qualification beyond general PE licensure before assigning the structural footing task.

Treat Engineer B's valid PE license as sufficient evidence of competence for the structural footing assignment, on the basis that professional licensure is the established legal standard for engineering qualification and that the contractor is not positioned to second-guess the licensing board's determination.

Require Engineer B to provide a written self-certification of competence for structural footing design before retention, placing the verification burden on Engineer B's professional representation rather than conducting an independent credential investigation — consistent with the profession's primary self-policing norm.

Construction Contractor