Engineer-Safety-Recommendation-Rejection-Standard-Instance
Rs · Resource
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/89#Engineer-Safety-Recommendation-Rejection-Standard-Instance
Properties
Instance of
EngineerSafetyRecommendationRejectionStandard
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#EngineerSafetyRecommendationRejectionStandard
Confidence
0.93
Created by
Professional engineering ethics review bodies
Document title
Engineer Safety Recommendation Rejection Standard
Importance
high
Used by
Engineer A when client declines safety-protective recommendation on cost grounds
Used in context
Governs Engineer A's professional obligations after the client refuses to hire an on-site project representative despite the engineer's documented safety recommendation, including whether Engineer A may ethically continue the engagement and what further steps are required.
Version
Current
Source Evidence
Source text
Because of the potentially dangerous nature of implementing the design during the construction phase, Engineer A recommends to the client that a full-time, on-site project representative be hired for the project
Text references
Because of the potentially dangerous nature of implementing the design during the construction phase, Engineer A recommends to the client that a full-time, on-site project representative be hired for the project
Engineer A proceeds with his work on the project
the client indicates to Engineer A that the project would be too costly if such a representative were hired
TTL
@prefix case89: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/89#> .
@prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> .
@prefix proeth: <http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#> .
@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#> .
case89:Engineer-Safety-Recommendation-Rejection-Standard-Instance a proeth:EngineerSafetyRecommendationRejectionStandard,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Engineer-Safety-Recommendation-Rejection-Standard-Instance" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Resource" ;
proeth:confidence "0.93" ;
proeth:createdby "Professional engineering ethics review bodies" ;
proeth:discoveredincase "89" ;
proeth:discoveredinpass "1" ;
proeth:discoveredinsection "facts" ;
proeth:documenttitle "Engineer Safety Recommendation Rejection Standard" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-03-01T18:07:06.532223+00:00" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "89" ;
proeth:generatedattime "2026-03-01T18:07:06.532223+00:00" ;
proeth:importance "high" ;
proeth:resourceclass "Engineer Safety Recommendation Rejection Standard" ;
proeth:sourcetext "Because of the potentially dangerous nature of implementing the design during the construction phase, Engineer A recommends to the client that a full-time, on-site project representative be hired for the project" ;
proeth:textreferences "Because of the potentially dangerous nature of implementing the design during the construction phase, Engineer A recommends to the client that a full-time, on-site project representative be hired for the project",
"Engineer A proceeds with his work on the project",
"the client indicates to Engineer A that the project would be too costly if such a representative were hired" ;
proeth:usedby "Engineer A when client declines safety-protective recommendation on cost grounds" ;
proeth:usedincontext "Governs Engineer A's professional obligations after the client refuses to hire an on-site project representative despite the engineer's documented safety recommendation, including whether Engineer A may ethically continue the engagement and what further steps are required." ;
proeth:version "Current" ;
proeth:wasattributedto "Case 89 Extraction" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-03-01T18:38:27.063160"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 89 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
89
Discovered in pass
1
Discovered in section
facts
First discovered
2026-03-01T18:07:06.532223+00:00
First case
89
Generated
2026-03-01T18:07:06.532223+00:00
Attributed to
Case 89 Extraction
Generated
2026-03-01T18:38:27.063160
Generated by
ProEthica Case 89 Extraction