DP4
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/148#DP4
Properties
Instance of
Decision Point Id
DP4
Decision question
Should Engineer F disclose the contractor license revocation on the employment application despite the question's narrow wording, or answer 'no' on the ground that the question literally covers only PE license discipline?
Focus
Engineer F's decision whether to disclose the revocation of his fire sprinkler contractor license on the engineering firm's employment application, given that the application question referenced only discipline 'in the practice of professional engineering' while his contractor license — revoked for lending his license number to an unlicensed individual — was a non-PE license adjudicated for an integrity violation in a safety-critical domain.
Option1
Voluntarily disclose the contractor license revocation on the employment application, interpreting the disciplinary question according to its evident purpose of assessing character and fitness, and provide a brief explanation of the circumstances and any remedial steps taken.
Option2
Answer 'no' to the disciplinary question on the ground that the question's wording expressly references only discipline in the practice of professional engineering or PE license suspension/revocation, and the contractor license is a separate, non-PE credential outside the question's literal scope.
Option3
Answer 'no' to the application question as written but commit to full disclosure if the interviewer or firm separately and explicitly asks about contractor licenses, occupational licenses in other fields, or any adjudicated disciplinary proceedings of any kind.
Role
Engineer F
TTL
@prefix case148: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/148#> .
@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#> .
case148:DP4 a proeth-cases:DecisionPoint,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "DP4" ;
proeth:decisionPointId "DP4" ;
proeth:decisionQuestion "Should Engineer F disclose the contractor license revocation on the employment application despite the question's narrow wording, or answer 'no' on the ground that the question literally covers only PE license discipline?" ;
proeth:focus "Engineer F's decision whether to disclose the revocation of his fire sprinkler contractor license on the engineering firm's employment application, given that the application question referenced only discipline 'in the practice of professional engineering' while his contractor license — revoked for lending his license number to an unlicensed individual — was a non-PE license adjudicated for an integrity violation in a safety-critical domain." ;
proeth:option1 "Voluntarily disclose the contractor license revocation on the employment application, interpreting the disciplinary question according to its evident purpose of assessing character and fitness, and provide a brief explanation of the circumstances and any remedial steps taken." ;
proeth:option2 "Answer 'no' to the disciplinary question on the ground that the question's wording expressly references only discipline in the practice of professional engineering or PE license suspension/revocation, and the contractor license is a separate, non-PE credential outside the question's literal scope." ;
proeth:option3 "Answer 'no' to the application question as written but commit to full disclosure if the interviewer or firm separately and explicitly asks about contractor licenses, occupational licenses in other fields, or any adjudicated disciplinary proceedings of any kind." ;
proeth:roleLabel "Engineer F" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-02-28T23:27:29.020083"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 148 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Generated
2026-02-28T23:27:29.020083
Generated by
ProEthica Case 148 Extraction