BER-84-5 Engineer A Cost-Pressure Safety Recommendation Abandonment
O · Obligation
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/136#BER-84-5_Engineer_A_Cost-Pressure_Safety_Recommendation_Abandonment
Properties
Instance of
ClientSafetyViolationInsistenceorProjectWithdrawalObligation
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#ClientSafetyViolationInsistenceorProjectWithdrawalObligation
Case context
BER Case 84-5: Engineer A was hired for complete engineering services on a potentially dangerous construction project; recommended a full-time on-site project representative; client refused on cost grounds; Engineer A proceeded with the work without the recommended safety measure.
Compliance status
unmet
Confidence
0.92
Importance
high
Obligated party
Engineer A (BER 84-5)
Obligation statement
Engineer A was obligated to insist that the client authorize a full-time on-site project representative as a condition of proceeding with the potentially dangerous construction project, or to withdraw from the project rather than abandoning the safety recommendation when the client objected on cost grounds.
Temporal scope
Upon client's refusal to authorize the full-time on-site project representative and before proceeding with further work on the project
Relationships
derivedFromPrinciple
Insistence on Client Remedial Action — BER 84-5 Safety Representative Refusal
Source Evidence
Source text
Engineer A proceeded with the work on the project even though he had recommended that a full-time, on-site project representative should be hired.
Text references
Engineer A proceeded with the work on the project even though he had recommended that a full-time, on-site project representative should be hired.
Engineer A was in violation of Section II.1.a. of the Code.
when costs concerns where raised by the client, Engineer A abandoned the ethical duty and proceeded with the work on the project.
TTL
@prefix case136: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/136#> .
@prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> .
@prefix proeth: <http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#> .
@prefix proeth-core: <http://proethica.org/ontology/core#> .
@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#> .
case136:BER-84-5_Engineer_A_Cost-Pressure_Safety_Recommendation_Abandonment a proeth:ClientSafetyViolationInsistenceorProjectWithdrawalObligation,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "BER-84-5 Engineer A Cost-Pressure Safety Recommendation Abandonment" ;
proeth-core:competesWith case136:BER-84-5_Engineer_A_Passive_Acquiescence_to_Client_Cost-Driven_Safety_Override ;
proeth-core:prevailsOver case136:BER-84-5_Engineer_A_Passive_Acquiescence_to_Client_Cost-Driven_Safety_Override ;
proeth:casecontext "BER Case 84-5: Engineer A was hired for complete engineering services on a potentially dangerous construction project; recommended a full-time on-site project representative; client refused on cost grounds; Engineer A proceeded with the work without the recommended safety measure." ;
proeth:compliancestatus "unmet" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Obligation" ;
proeth:confidence "0.92" ;
proeth:derivedFromPrinciple <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/136#Insistence_on_Client_Remedial_Action_—_BER_84-5_Safety_Representative_Refusal> ;
proeth:discoveredincase "136" ;
proeth:discoveredinpass "2" ;
proeth:discoveredinsection "discussion" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-03-01T13:06:01.020008+00:00" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "136" ;
proeth:generatedattime "2026-03-01T13:06:01.020008+00:00" ;
proeth:importance "high" ;
proeth:obligatedparty "Engineer A (BER 84-5)" ;
proeth:obligationclass "Client Safety Violation Insistence or Project Withdrawal Obligation" ;
proeth:obligationstatement "Engineer A was obligated to insist that the client authorize a full-time on-site project representative as a condition of proceeding with the potentially dangerous construction project, or to withdraw from the project rather than abandoning the safety recommendation when the client objected on cost grounds." ;
proeth:sourcetext "Engineer A proceeded with the work on the project even though he had recommended that a full-time, on-site project representative should be hired." ;
proeth:temporalscope "Upon client's refusal to authorize the full-time on-site project representative and before proceeding with further work on the project" ;
proeth:textreferences "Engineer A proceeded with the work on the project even though he had recommended that a full-time, on-site project representative should be hired.",
"Engineer A was in violation of Section II.1.a. of the Code.",
"when costs concerns where raised by the client, Engineer A abandoned the ethical duty and proceeded with the work on the project." ;
proeth:wasattributedto "Case 136 Extraction" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-03-01T13:14:37.527504"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 136 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
136
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
discussion
First discovered
2026-03-01T13:06:01.020008+00:00
First case
136
Generated
2026-03-01T13:06:01.020008+00:00
Attributed to
Case 136 Extraction
Generated
2026-03-01T13:14:37.527504
Generated by
ProEthica Case 136 Extraction