Engineer B Discharge-Threatening Supervisor
R · Role
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/82#Engineer_B_Discharge-Threatening_Supervisor
Definition
Supervisor of Engineer A at XYZ Manufacturing who warned Engineer A that continued public advocacy activities on behalf of the Citizens Committee would result in discharge, citing embarrassment to the employer, despite Engineer A not having named the employer or any specific company.
Properties
Instance of
Discharge-ThreateningEngineeringSupervisor
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#Discharge-ThreateningEngineeringSupervisor
Attributes
| authority | Direct supervisor of Engineer A |
| action_taken | Issued termination warning |
| stated_rationale | Engineer A was putting employer in embarrassing position |
Confidence
0.9
Importance
high
Relationships
| type | represents_interests_of |
| target | XYZ Manufacturing Company |
| type | supervises |
| target | Engineer A Product Quality Standards Legislative Advocate |
Role category
employer_relationship
Relationships
adheresToPrinciple
Employer Embarrassment Non-Justification Invoked Against Engineer Bs Thre at, Employer Embarrassment Non-Justification Principle Invoked Against Engineer Bs Thre at, Engineering Business-Profession Duality Integrity Invoked in XYZ Manufacturing Context, Faithful Agent Obligation With in Ethical Limits Applied to Engineer Bs Supervisory Role, Loyalty Boundary Invoked in Engineer A vs. XYZ Manufacturing Tension, Supervis or Ethics Code Binding Non-Exemption Invoked Against Engineer B
hasObligation
Engineer A Civic Advocacy Employer Non-Interference Right, Engineer A Extra-Employment Civic Advocacy Freedom Citizens Committee, Engineer B Civic Advocacy Suppression Employer Embarrassment Non-Justification, Engineer B Employer Embarrassment Discharge Thre at Non-Justification, Engineer B Ethics Code Binding Supervis or Non-Exemption Public Welfare Provisions, Engineer B Supervis or Employer-Protective Intent Non-Excuse Code Violation
Source Evidence
Source text
Engineer B, the supervisor of Engineer A, warned him that if he continued in his activities, he would be discharged
Text references
Engineer B, the supervisor of Engineer A, warned him that if he continued in his activities, he would be discharged
because he was putting his employer in an embarrassing position
even though Engineer A had not mentioned the products of his employer or any other specific company
TTL
@prefix case82: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/82#> .
@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#> .
case82:Engineer_B_Discharge-Threatening_Supervisor a proeth:Discharge-ThreateningEngineeringSupervisor,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Engineer B Discharge-Threatening Supervisor" ;
proeth-core:adheresToPrinciple case82:Employer_Embarrassment_Non-Justification_Invoked_Against_Engineer_Bs_Threat,
case82:Employer_Embarrassment_Non-Justification_Principle_Invoked_Against_Engineer_Bs_Threat,
case82:Engineering_Business-Profession_Duality_Integrity_Invoked_in_XYZ_Manufacturing_Context,
case82:Faithful_Agent_Obligation_Within_Ethical_Limits_Applied_to_Engineer_Bs_Supervisory_Role,
case82:Loyalty_Boundary_Invoked_in_Engineer_A_vs._XYZ_Manufacturing_Tension,
case82:Supervisor_Ethics_Code_Binding_Non-Exemption_Invoked_Against_Engineer_B ;
proeth-core:hasObligation case82:Engineer_A_Civic_Advocacy_Employer_Non-Interference_Right,
case82:Engineer_A_Extra-Employment_Civic_Advocacy_Freedom_Citizens_Committee,
case82:Engineer_B_Civic_Advocacy_Suppression_Employer_Embarrassment_Non-Justification,
case82:Engineer_B_Employer_Embarrassment_Discharge_Threat_Non-Justification,
case82:Engineer_B_Ethics_Code_Binding_Supervisor_Non-Exemption_Public_Welfare_Provisions,
case82:Engineer_B_Supervisor_Employer-Protective_Intent_Non-Excuse_Code_Violation ;
proeth:attributes "{'authority': 'Direct supervisor of Engineer A', 'action_taken': 'Issued termination warning', 'stated_rationale': 'Engineer A was putting employer in embarrassing position'}" ;
proeth:caseinvolvement "Supervisor of Engineer A at XYZ Manufacturing who warned Engineer A that continued public advocacy activities on behalf of the Citizens Committee would result in discharge, citing embarrassment to the employer, despite Engineer A not having named the employer or any specific company." ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Role" ;
proeth:confidence "0.9" ;
proeth:discoveredincase "82" ;
proeth:discoveredinpass "1" ;
proeth:discoveredinsection "facts" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-03-02T13:34:07.328126+00:00" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "82" ;
proeth:generatedattime "2026-03-02T13:34:07.328126+00:00" ;
proeth:importance "high" ;
proeth:relationships "{'type': 'represents_interests_of', 'target': 'XYZ Manufacturing Company'}",
"{'type': 'supervises', 'target': 'Engineer A Product Quality Standards Legislative Advocate'}" ;
proeth:rolecategory "employer_relationship" ;
proeth:roleclass "Discharge-Threatening Engineering Supervisor" ;
proeth:sourcetext "Engineer B, the supervisor of Engineer A, warned him that if he continued in his activities, he would be discharged" ;
proeth:textreferences "Engineer B, the supervisor of Engineer A, warned him that if he continued in his activities, he would be discharged",
"because he was putting his employer in an embarrassing position",
"even though Engineer A had not mentioned the products of his employer or any other specific company" ;
proeth:wasattributedto "Case 82 Extraction" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-03-02T13:59:43.309360"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 82 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
82
Discovered in pass
1
Discovered in section
facts
First discovered
2026-03-02T13:34:07.328126+00:00
First case
82
Generated
2026-03-02T13:34:07.328126+00:00
Attributed to
Case 82 Extraction
Generated
2026-03-02T13:59:43.309360
Generated by
ProEthica Case 82 Extraction