Engineer W Supervisor Indirect Communication Policy Evasion Prohibition Shadyvale
O · Obligation
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/58#Engineer_W_Supervisor_Indirect_Communication_Policy_Evasion_Prohibition_Shadyvale
Properties
Instance of
SupervisorIndirectCommunicationPolicyEvasionProhibitionObligation
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#SupervisorIndirectCommunicationPolicyEvasionProhibitionObligation
Case context
Engineer W communicated the directive to revise the design to incorporate the old water main indirectly, in a manner that appeared designed to avoid explicit acknowledgment that the revision would violate DOT cost-allocation policy.
Compliance status
unmet
Confidence
0.87
Importance
high
Obligated party
Engineer W
Obligation statement
Engineer W was obligated to refrain from communicating the policy-violating design revision directive to Engineer Intern D indirectly or ambiguously as a means of avoiding explicit acknowledgment of the DOT policy conflict, recognizing that indirect communication designed to obscure a policy violation is itself a form of dishonesty that compounds the underlying ethical violation and places the intern in an untenable professional position.
Temporal scope
At the time Engineer W communicated the design revision directive to Engineer Intern D
Relationships
derivedFromPrinciple
Honesty in Professional Representations Violated by Engineer W Deceptive Direction
Source Evidence
Source text
Engineer W's willingness to overlook DOT policy is inconsistent with Canon 4, the engineer's obligation to act as faithful agent or trustee of one's employer and with Canon 5, to avoid deception.
Text references
Engineer W's willingness to overlook DOT policy is inconsistent with Canon 4, the engineer's obligation to act as faithful agent or trustee of one's employer and with Canon 5, to avoid deception.
Honesty in Professional Representations -- Engineer W's use of indirect communication to convey the policy-violating design revision directive — rather than explicitly acknowledging the policy conflict...
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_Supervisor_Indirect_Communication_Policy_Evasion_Prohibition_Shadyvale a proeth:SupervisorIndirectCommunicationPolicyEvasionProhibitionObligation,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Engineer W Supervisor Indirect Communication Policy Evasion Prohibition Shadyvale" ;
proeth-core:defeasibleUnder <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/58#DOT_Policy_Circumvention_Design_Manipulation_—_Engineer_W_to_Engineer_Intern_D> ;
proeth:casecontext "Engineer W communicated the directive to revise the design to incorporate the old water main indirectly, in a manner that appeared designed to avoid explicit acknowledgment that the revision would violate DOT cost-allocation policy." ;
proeth:compliancestatus "unmet" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Obligation" ;
proeth:confidence "0.87" ;
proeth:derivedFromPrinciple case58:Honesty_in_Professional_Representations_Violated_by_Engineer_W_Deceptive_Direction ;
proeth:discoveredincase "58" ;
proeth:discoveredinpass "2" ;
proeth:discoveredinsection "discussion" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-02-25T21:58:16.305408+00:00" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "58" ;
proeth:generatedattime "2026-02-25T21:58:16.305408+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 policy-violating design revision directive to Engineer Intern D indirectly or ambiguously as a means of avoiding explicit acknowledgment of the DOT policy conflict, recognizing that indirect communication designed to obscure a policy violation is itself a form of dishonesty that compounds the underlying ethical violation and places the intern in an untenable professional position." ;
proeth:sourcetext "Engineer W's willingness to overlook DOT policy is inconsistent with Canon 4, the engineer's obligation to act as faithful agent or trustee of one's employer and with Canon 5, to avoid deception." ;
proeth:temporalscope "At the time Engineer W communicated the design revision directive to Engineer Intern D" ;
proeth:textreferences "Engineer W's willingness to overlook DOT policy is inconsistent with Canon 4, the engineer's obligation to act as faithful agent or trustee of one's employer and with Canon 5, to avoid deception.",
"Honesty in Professional Representations -- Engineer W's use of indirect communication to convey the policy-violating design revision directive — rather than explicitly acknowledging the policy conflict..." ;
proeth:wasattributedto "Case 58 Extraction" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-02-25T22:07:12.212880"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 58 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
58
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
discussion
First discovered
2026-02-25T21:58:16.305408+00:00
First case
58
Generated
2026-02-25T21:58:16.305408+00:00
Attributed to
Case 58 Extraction
Generated
2026-02-25T22:07:12.212880
Generated by
ProEthica Case 58 Extraction