Engineer W Indirect Communication Policy Evasion Prohibition Obligation
O · Obligation
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/58#Engineer_W_Indirect_Communication_Policy_Evasion_Prohibition_Obligation
Properties
Instance of
SupervisorIndirectCommunicationPolicyEvasionProhibitionObligation
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#SupervisorIndirectCommunicationPolicyEvasionProhibitionObligation
Case context
Engineer W chose to convey the policy-violating design revision directive 'in an indirect way,' which appears designed to avoid creating a documented record of explicit policy violation and to place the implementation burden on Engineer Intern D while maintaining plausible deniability. This indirect communication style is itself a violation of the honesty obligation.
Compliance status
unmet
Confidence
0.89
Importance
high
Obligated party
Engineer W
Obligation statement
Engineer W was obligated to refrain from communicating the design revision directive indirectly — in a manner designed to avoid explicit acknowledgment of the DOT cost-allocation policy conflict — and instead to communicate any directive clearly and explicitly, including acknowledging the policy conflict and the agency's authority to resolve it, rather than placing Engineer Intern D in the position of implementing a policy-violating revision without explicit supervisory acknowledgment of the violation.
Temporal scope
At the time of communicating the design revision directive during design development review
Relationships
Source Evidence
Source text
Engineer W conveys to Engineer Intern D in an indirect way that the design should be revised so that the old water main is impacted.
Text references
Engineer W conveys to Engineer Intern D in an indirect way that the design should be revised so that the old water main is impacted.
State DOT policy unambiguously requires that only unavoidable utility conflicts will be paid for as part of highway projects.
TTL
@prefix case58: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/58#> .
@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#> .
case58:Engineer_W_Indirect_Communication_Policy_Evasion_Prohibition_Obligation a proeth:SupervisorIndirectCommunicationPolicyEvasionProhibitionObligation,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Engineer W Indirect Communication Policy Evasion Prohibition Obligation" ;
proeth-core:defeasibleUnder <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/58#DOT_Policy_Circumvention_Design_Manipulation_—_Engineer_W_to_Engineer_Intern_D> ;
proeth:casecontext "Engineer W chose to convey the policy-violating design revision directive 'in an indirect way,' which appears designed to avoid creating a documented record of explicit policy violation and to place the implementation burden on Engineer Intern D while maintaining plausible deniability. This indirect communication style is itself a violation of the honesty obligation." ;
proeth:compliancestatus "unmet" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Obligation" ;
proeth:confidence "0.89" ;
proeth:derivedFromPrinciple case58:Honesty_in_Professional_Representations_Violated_By_Engineer_W_Indirect_Communication ;
proeth:discoveredincase "58" ;
proeth:discoveredinpass "2" ;
proeth:discoveredinsection "facts" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-02-25T21:52:11.308597+00:00" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "58" ;
proeth:generatedattime "2026-02-25T21:52:11.308597+00:00" ;
proeth:importance "high" ;
proeth:obligatedparty "Engineer W" ;
proeth:obligationclass "Supervisor Indirect Communication Policy Evasion Prohibition Obligation" ;
proeth:obligationstatement "Engineer W was obligated to refrain from communicating the design revision directive indirectly — in a manner designed to avoid explicit acknowledgment of the DOT cost-allocation policy conflict — and instead to communicate any directive clearly and explicitly, including acknowledging the policy conflict and the agency's authority to resolve it, rather than placing Engineer Intern D in the position of implementing a policy-violating revision without explicit supervisory acknowledgment of the violation." ;
proeth:sourcetext "Engineer W conveys to Engineer Intern D in an indirect way that the design should be revised so that the old water main is impacted." ;
proeth:temporalscope "At the time of communicating the design revision directive during design development review" ;
proeth:textreferences "Engineer W conveys to Engineer Intern D in an indirect way that the design should be revised so that the old water main is impacted.",
"State DOT policy unambiguously requires that only unavoidable utility conflicts will be paid for as part of highway projects." ;
proeth:wasattributedto "Case 58 Extraction" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-02-25T22:07:12.203444"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 58 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
58
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
facts
First discovered
2026-02-25T21:52:11.308597+00:00
First case
58
Generated
2026-02-25T21:52:11.308597+00:00
Attributed to
Case 58 Extraction
Generated
2026-02-25T22:07:12.203444
Generated by
ProEthica Case 58 Extraction