ENGR201 Professional Practice & Responsibility ©

Tutorial 2: Ethical Analysis

The case study you will discuss here is related to the lecture on ethics and ethical
analysis.
In the lecture, we discussed that ethical analysis or reasoning has five steps – i) moral
clarity; ii) conceptual clarity; iii) gathering information; iv) consider all options; and v)
make a reasonable decision. Bear these steps in mind when you read the case study
below.

Case Study: The Forklifter

Engineering student Bryan has a high-paid summer job as a forklift operator. This job
enables him to attend college without having to take out any student loans. He is now
staring at a 50-gallon drum filled with used machine coolant, wondering what he should
do.
Just moments ago, Bryan’s supervisor, Max, told him to dump half of the used coolant
down the drain. Knowing the coolant was toxic, Bryan noted this to Max, but Max was
not swayed.
Max: The toxins settle at the bottom of the drum. If you pour out half and dilute it with
tap water while you are pouring it, there is no problem.
Bryan: I don’t think that’s going to work. Besides isn’t it against the law?
Max: Look, kid, I don’t have the time for chitchat about a bunch of silly laws. If I spent
my time worrying about every little regulation that comes along, I’d never get anything
done – and neither will you. Common sense is my rule. I just told you – toxins settle at
the bottom, and most of them will stay there. We’ve been doing this for years, and
nothing’s happened.
Bryan: You mean not one’s said anything about it? That doesn’t mean the environment
isn’t being harmed.
Max: You aren’t one of those “environmentalists”, are you? You college guys spend too
much of your time in the “ivory tower.” It’s time to get real – and get on with the job. You
know, you’re lucky to have a good-paid job like this, kid. In three months, you will be
back in your cozy college. Meanwhile, how many other college kids do you think are out

© May not be copied or duplicated

without the permission of the owner. 1
there wondering if they’ll be able to afford to go back – kids who’d give their eyetooth to
be where you are right now.
Max then left, fully expecting Bryan to dump the used coolant. Bryan stared at the drum,
he pondered his options. What options do you think he has?
Conduct an ethical analysis of the above case.

1. In the above case, what are three relevant moral values that Bryan faces? Justify each
value.

Competence & Integrity: He would have to verify the claims of his boss and determine if
there is really any potential harm.

Social Commitment: There could easily be negative impacts from dumping and not
saying anything could result in the further harm.

Responsibility: He is being given a direct instruction from his higher up which conflicts
with he other moral obligations that have been previously mentioned.

2. Clarify the different aspects of the values relevant in this case.

Competence & Integrity: He should verify the facts like we said with information from
reliable sources. Despite his personal personal gain, he would defile his own
environmental consciousness as part of his integrity by listening to his boss.

Social Commitment: He needs to consider all the ways and groups that can be affected
negatively by his actions. Theres the environmental damage aspect but also the moral
aspect letting things slide creates a bad standards for society.

Responsibility: Based on his responsibility and connection there are various ways he
could negotiate to make the situation better. It is also in his responsibility to help the
company avoid violations.

3. What information should Bryan collect in the short and long-term?

© May not be copied or duplicated

without the permission of the owner. 2
 Short term: He should look up regulations, verify if this product negatively impacts the
environment, finally he should go to someone higher up and find out more about this
practice in the company.

Long term: If things don’t work out internally, he should seek external help from the OIQ.
Investigate long term environmental effects of his companies’ practices.

4. What options are available to Bryan?

Inaction: Listening to his directives and following his responsibility to the company

Internal: Consult his supervisor further, consult a higher up, share information with
coworkers.

External: Research the potential damage, Report the behaviour to the OIQ, publicize the
information.

5. What action should Bryan take? What are the consequences of taking that action?

The safest action that conflicts the least with his moral objectives would be consulting
higher ups. He should come to them with the results of his research and present the facts
objectively. These people would have a greater interest in the image of the company and
any potential blowback.

The consequences could include loss of employment or ostracization in the company but
doing it this way minimizes his risk by allowing him to come forward publicly within the
company.

Zaen Alabdeen Abbas 40298881

Alexis Villeneuve 40284463

Mohamed Yassine messoudi drissi 40282756

Souhail Ouchai 40286766

Shawn Burazer 40262498

© May not be copied or duplicated

without the permission of the owner. 3