DP1
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/130#DP1
Properties
Instance of
Decision Point Id
DP1
Decision question
Was Engineer Intern A ethically obligated to proactively disclose his two prior PE exam failures at the interview, even though XYZ Consultants never asked about prior exam attempts?
Focus
Engineer Intern A's pre-employment silence about two prior PE exam failures when applying for a position explicitly conditioned on PE licensure within 90 days — weighing the candidate's personal privacy interest and the employer's failure to ask against the materiality-based disclosure obligation and the implicit representation of being on track for licensure.
Option1
Proactively volunteer the two prior PE exam failures at the interview, framing them in context of preparation and confidence in the upcoming attempt, so that XYZ Consultants can make an informed offer with accurate knowledge of the licensure trajectory
Option2
Remain silent about prior exam failures in the absence of a direct question, relying on the employer's responsibility to conduct its own due diligence and on the candidate's reasonable belief that a third attempt will succeed, while accurately representing the intent to sit for the exam imminently
Option3
Disclose the prior exam failures only if directly asked, but proactively request that the employer clarify or extend the 90-day licensure condition before accepting the offer, thereby surfacing the licensure risk without volunteering the specific failure history
Role
Engineer Intern A (Pre-Employment)
TTL
@prefix case130: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/130#> .
@prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> .
@prefix proeth: <http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#> .
@prefix proeth-cases: <http://proethica.org/ontology/cases#> .
@prefix prov: <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#> .
@prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .
@prefix xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#> .
case130:DP1 a proeth-cases:DecisionPoint,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "DP1" ;
proeth:decisionPointId "DP1" ;
proeth:decisionQuestion "Was Engineer Intern A ethically obligated to proactively disclose his two prior PE exam failures at the interview, even though XYZ Consultants never asked about prior exam attempts?" ;
proeth:focus "Engineer Intern A's pre-employment silence about two prior PE exam failures when applying for a position explicitly conditioned on PE licensure within 90 days — weighing the candidate's personal privacy interest and the employer's failure to ask against the materiality-based disclosure obligation and the implicit representation of being on track for licensure." ;
proeth:option1 "Proactively volunteer the two prior PE exam failures at the interview, framing them in context of preparation and confidence in the upcoming attempt, so that XYZ Consultants can make an informed offer with accurate knowledge of the licensure trajectory" ;
proeth:option2 "Remain silent about prior exam failures in the absence of a direct question, relying on the employer's responsibility to conduct its own due diligence and on the candidate's reasonable belief that a third attempt will succeed, while accurately representing the intent to sit for the exam imminently" ;
proeth:option3 "Disclose the prior exam failures only if directly asked, but proactively request that the employer clarify or extend the 90-day licensure condition before accepting the offer, thereby surfacing the licensure risk without volunteering the specific failure history" ;
proeth:roleLabel "Engineer Intern A (Pre-Employment)" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-02-26T10:01:18.536166"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 130 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Generated
2026-02-26T10:01:18.536166
Generated by
ProEthica Case 130 Extraction