DP10
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/160#DP10
Properties
Instance of
Decision Point Id
DP10
Decision question
Should Company B engineers refuse to participate in any engineering activity connected with the project until they are personally satisfied the machinery is safe, or should they continue participating under some form of qualified engagement after exhausting internal escalation?
Focus
Company B Engineers: Production Participation Refusal and Sustained Safety Opinion Persistence
Option1
Completely disengage from all engineering activity connected with the project — including design, fabrication, supervisory, administrative, and quality-assurance roles — until personally satisfied the machinery is safe, accepting employment loss as the professional cost of this refusal.
Option2
Remain on the project in a documented capacity while filing a formal written disclaimer of personal responsibility for the disputed design, reasoning that the concern has been registered and the employer's business judgment now governs the production decision.
Option3
Withdraw from hands-on design and fabrication work directly connected to the disputed machinery while continuing in administrative, scheduling, or quality-assurance roles for unrelated project components, on the grounds that indirect roles do not constitute participation in building the unsafe equipment.
Role
Engineer
TTL
@prefix case160: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/160#> .
@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#> .
case160:DP10 a proeth-cases:DecisionPoint,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "DP10" ;
proeth:decisionPointId "DP10" ;
proeth:decisionQuestion "Should Company B engineers refuse to participate in any engineering activity connected with the project until they are personally satisfied the machinery is safe, or should they continue participating under some form of qualified engagement after exhausting internal escalation?" ;
proeth:focus "Company B Engineers: Production Participation Refusal and Sustained Safety Opinion Persistence" ;
proeth:option1 "Completely disengage from all engineering activity connected with the project — including design, fabrication, supervisory, administrative, and quality-assurance roles — until personally satisfied the machinery is safe, accepting employment loss as the professional cost of this refusal." ;
proeth:option2 "Remain on the project in a documented capacity while filing a formal written disclaimer of personal responsibility for the disputed design, reasoning that the concern has been registered and the employer's business judgment now governs the production decision." ;
proeth:option3 "Withdraw from hands-on design and fabrication work directly connected to the disputed machinery while continuing in administrative, scheduling, or quality-assurance roles for unrelated project components, on the grounds that indirect roles do not constitute participation in building the unsafe equipment." ;
proeth:roleLabel "Engineer" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-03-02T15:10:46.723075"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 160 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Generated
2026-03-02T15:10:46.723075
Generated by
ProEthica Case 160 Extraction