Engineer B Employer Embarrassment Discharge Threat Non-Justification
O · Obligation
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/82#Engineer_B_Employer_Embarrassment_Discharge_Threat_Non-Justification
Properties
Instance of
EmployerEmbarrassmentNon-JustificationforCivicAdvocacySuppressionObligation
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#EmployerEmbarrassmentNon-JustificationforCivicAdvocacySuppressionObligation
Case context
Engineer B warned Engineer A of discharge for continuing Citizens Committee activities, citing only employer embarrassment as justification, despite Engineer A having made no reference to XYZ Manufacturing or any specific company.
Compliance status
unmet
Confidence
0.92
Importance
high
Obligated party
Engineer B (supervisor at XYZ Manufacturing)
Obligation statement
Engineer B was obligated to refrain from threatening Engineer A with discharge on the sole ground that Engineer A's Citizens Committee activities were putting the employer in an embarrassing position, given that Engineer A had not disclosed confidential employer information, had not named specific companies, and had not committed any professional misconduct.
Temporal scope
At the time Engineer B issued the discharge warning to Engineer A
Relationships
defeasibleUnder
Engineer A Employment Termination Thre at, Engineer B — Supervis or Code Violation by Threatening Subordinates Civic Advocacy
derivedFromPrinciple
Employer Embarrassment Non-Justification Invoked Against Engineer Bs Thre at
Source Evidence
Source text
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
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 in his activities on behalf of the Citizens Committee
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_Employer_Embarrassment_Discharge_Threat_Non-Justification a proeth:EmployerEmbarrassmentNon-JustificationforCivicAdvocacySuppressionObligation,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Engineer B Employer Embarrassment Discharge Threat Non-Justification" ;
proeth-core:competesWith case82:Engineer_A_Extra-Employment_Civic_Advocacy_Freedom_Citizens_Committee ;
proeth-core:defeasibleUnder case82:Engineer_A_Employment_Termination_Threat,
<http://proethica.org/ontology/case/82#Engineer_B_—_Supervisor_Code_Violation_by_Threatening_Subordinates_Civic_Advocacy> ;
proeth:casecontext "Engineer B warned Engineer A of discharge for continuing Citizens Committee activities, citing only employer embarrassment as justification, despite Engineer A having made no reference to XYZ Manufacturing or any specific company." ;
proeth:compliancestatus "unmet" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Obligation" ;
proeth:confidence "0.92" ;
proeth:derivedFromPrinciple case82:Employer_Embarrassment_Non-Justification_Invoked_Against_Engineer_Bs_Threat ;
proeth:discoveredincase "82" ;
proeth:discoveredinpass "2" ;
proeth:discoveredinsection "facts" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-03-02T13:39:58.179686+00:00" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "82" ;
proeth:generatedattime "2026-03-02T13:39:58.179686+00:00" ;
proeth:importance "high" ;
proeth:obligatedparty "Engineer B (supervisor at XYZ Manufacturing)" ;
proeth:obligationclass "Employer Embarrassment Non-Justification for Civic Advocacy Suppression Obligation" ;
proeth:obligationstatement "Engineer B was obligated to refrain from threatening Engineer A with discharge on the sole ground that Engineer A's Citizens Committee activities were putting the employer in an embarrassing position, given that Engineer A had not disclosed confidential employer information, had not named specific companies, and had not committed any professional misconduct." ;
proeth:sourcetext "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" ;
proeth:temporalscope "At the time Engineer B issued the discharge warning to Engineer A" ;
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 in his activities on behalf of the Citizens Committee" ;
proeth:wasattributedto "Case 82 Extraction" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-03-02T13:59:43.309895"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 82 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
82
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
facts
First discovered
2026-03-02T13:39:58.179686+00:00
First case
82
Generated
2026-03-02T13:39:58.179686+00:00
Attributed to
Case 82 Extraction
Generated
2026-03-02T13:59:43.309895
Generated by
ProEthica Case 82 Extraction