Bursic 02:00
L13
AN ETHICAL DILEMMA IN THE AUTOMOTIVE DESIGN PROCESS
Francisc Grigore (frg15@pitt.edu)
THE ETHICAL DILEMMA
The automotive engineers at Volkswagen are facing an
ethical dilemma about their new 2016 Jetta and its
transmission system. I am part of the team of mechanical
engineers that are working with the transmission system and
all of the other car components it interacts with such as the
rear and front axle as well as the wheels and braking
systems. A few months ago our team had to recreate the
transmission system for the upcoming new 2016 Jetta
because of a major change in the chassis of the car. The task
is relatively challenging and we are a month below the
deadline, however, we recently received statistics of the
predicted 2016 Jetta demographic. We were told that in
years before the majority of people that bought the Jetta
were from the northeast United States area and they will
most likely stay in the same area for the 2016 Jetta. This
meant that our cars were mainly being used in a non-extreme
climate area. We had a meeting shortly afterwards and
discussed if we should change anything about our design due
to the new market information. My one coworker, Mark,
who is an esteemed automotive engineer, offered his opinion
and said that if the Jetta is being sold in non-extreme climate
areas then we can finish the design faster if we eliminate
testing in extreme weather temperatures. I found his idea to
be really smart because if we designed this transmission
system quicker, the whole team, including myself, would
have less stress about finishing this project on time. We
would also not have to look for material science engineers to
aid us on this project. The reason we would need a materials
science engineer is that they would help find materials that
can withstand high heat and humidity. Financially this is a
great idea because we could use cheaper materials and
overall bring down the cost of the car which would make
everyone at our company satisfied, as well as the consumers.
I could possibly receive a promotion for finishing the
transmission system on time against all odds. The impact of
how we design it would have a minimal impact on the
automotive engineering field for the reason that we are not
creating a new technology, but instead we are just using
proven methods to create a transmission system. Looking
back at what Mark said I feel as if it is ethically wrong
because if the car is used in extreme climate areas such as
Alaska or the Amazon or even in a desert environment,
drivers could get injured or in the worst case, die. However,
if we do not test for extreme conditions the release of the car
will most likely be pushed back and my team and I could
possibly get fired. I will have to think about what is the most
ethical decision to do and report to my team about my
thoughts tomorrow.
University of Pittsburgh, Swanson School of Engineering 1
2015-11-03
USING THE CODE OF ETHICS TO
DETERMINE A SOLUTION
I decided to look over the code of ethics from the
National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE) as well
as the one from the American Society of Mechanical
Engineers (ASME), to help me decide on what is the most
ethical decision. There are strong similarities between both
codes but the ones that overlap seem to be the key rules. The
ASME code, as well as the NSPE code, puts an emphasis
that, “Engineers shall hold paramount the safety, health, and
welfare of the public in the performance of their professional
duties”. [1]. Now my team, in this case, is putting their
personal interests and saving time over the public’s safety
and welfare and that seems to go against everything the code
stands for. That would be enough for me to say I do not feel
ethically correct on skipping the extreme weather conditions,
however, I feel as if I need more than just that point to
convince my colleagues to redesign it ethically. Another
useful rule in the code of ethics is as following: “Engineers
shall not complete, sign, or seal plans and/or specifications
that are not in conformity with applicable engineering
standards. If the client or employer insists on such
unprofessional conduct, they shall notify the proper
authorities and withdraw from further service on the
project”. [2]. I believe that testing a car in all possible
settings would be a typical engineering standard and that
failing to abide by engineering standards would have severe
consequences. These rules should have an effect on my team
and hopefully we decide to test the transmission system in
extreme weather conditions despite the fact that we may
very well be past our deadline and could lose our jobs.
A COMPARISON WITH ETHICAL CASE
STUDIES
It would not be wise to assume that our ethical dilemma
has not been seen before; therefore I will take a look at
multiple case studies regarding ethical decisions to compare
them to my personal dilemma. In one certain case study,
they examined the deaths due to airbags around the 1980s. It
is fair to say that airbags were designed to save people from
death and not kill them but in some cases people died from
misuse, particularly women and children. The engineers took
a look at what caused the deaths and responded by
redesigning the airbag and warning the public to wear seat
belts or else the force from the airbag could kill them. [3].
Introducing safety precautions to the public is a great idea to
eliminate unnecessary deaths. My team could redesign the
transmission system to work in extreme temperatures and
Francisc Grigore
then put safety precautions warning drivers to not let the
engine heat go in the “red zone” on the dashboard for
extended periods of time. Another case study I looked at
discusses a decision an engineer had to go through involving
a faulty alarm system. The faulty alarm system could not be
heard in some parts of the building, thus violating the local
fire safety codes. The engineer then proceeded to warn the
client that the alarm has to be remade in order to not violate
the fire safety codes. The client told the engineer that the
funding is not available now and that it will have to be done
at a later point. If the engineer does not resolve the issue
soon then he could face charges for violating the code of
ethics. The case study then discusses what the engineer
should do and the most ethical decision is to warn the client
that the alarm must be done right away in order to stop
preventable deaths due to fires. [4]. This is highly
comparable to my case because if we do not fix the issue at
hand we would most likely face charges for violating the
code of ethics. In both cases there is a financial dilemma; in
the first one the engineer does not have the funding available
at the time, while, in mine, we have the funding but it would
be more financially cost effective if we do not redesign the
transmission system. However, in both cases the code of
ethics takes higher priority over the financial problems at
hand. That is why I would recommend redesigning the
transmission system instead of taking the easy way out. The
final case study I researched involved a structural engineer
who received information from a student engineer that the
building he designed had a critical design flaw and could not
withstand the forces of strong winds. The structural engineer
realized that the student was right but if he redesigned the
building it would take a substantial amount of time, effort,
and money and also would possibly tarnish his reputation as
a structural engineer. [5]. It would be the correct ethical
decision to redesign the building and risk losing his
reputation in order to save lives. My dilemma is extremely
similar to this because redesigning the transmission would
not be easy and would have undesired consequences but if
we do not redesign it thousands of people could die. All of
these case studies are similar in the way that we are faced
with a decision to either go through something difficult or to
ignore that we could potentially harm or kill thousands of
people. The decision should be easy to see, always go the
extra mile to ensure that citizens will be safe.
products. This helps in two ways, my team will surely work
on testing in extreme conditions after I remind them of
“diesel gate” and secondly, we may get to keep our jobs if
we tell them that the other option is to lie to the public and
obviously it would make more sense for Volkswagen to hold
onto the Jetta for slightly longer rather than releasing an
unfinished product. If we decide to release an unfinished
product and there is a disaster involving death because of the
faulty transmission we would end up in the position that
Toyota was recently. Toyota had to issue a recall and ended
up recalling 3.8 million vehicles such as the Camry and
Avalon, and then the Prius on September 30 th, 2008. Then,
another recall of 4 million vehicles was issued on November
26th, 2009. The next year, Toyota had an even longer recall
list: 2.4 million sedans and trucks, 436,000 Prius hybrids,
600,000 Sienna minivans, 14,900 Lexus sedans, 50,000
Sequoia SUVs, 17,000 hybrid sedans, 373,000 Avalons, and
1.13 million Corolla and Matrix hatchbacks. Toyota also lost
the trust of the public and tarnished its once reputable
reputation because it failed to ethically promote the wellbeing of the public. [7]. Toyota did not follow the code of
ethics and how they should provide what is best for the
public which is why they now have a tarnished reputation.
Obviously a recall of this level happening to Volkswagen
after “diesel gate” would be devastating to Volkswagen’s
reputation and would cause many fines and would hurt the
company financially. This is a great case to present to my
team because no of us would want to have to recall a vehicle
and suffer what Toyota went through.
Vehicle Crashes and The Ethics involved
Over the time period that cars existed, there have been
two methods to look at what caused the risk to the driver in
the car. The first method is the “Crash Avoidance” approach,
which was popular up until the 1950s while the second one
is the “Crash Worthiness” approach, which was popular after
the 1950s. [8]. In the “Crash Avoidance” approach, the main
causes for risk of injury or death were hitting another car,
the road conditions, and the driver’s state of mind at the time
and that’s how the organizations involving automobile
technology or insurance viewed the accident. The main
approach that we see being used today is the “Crash
Worthiness” approach which involves viewing the risk of
injury or death as how preventable the car could have made
it, a good example would be airbags or advanced braking
systems. Since we now use the “Crash Worthiness”
approach it would ethically be my team’s fault if there was
an injury or death because of a faulty break. This shift in the
1950s sparked more ingenuity because the automotive
engineers were now blamed for the accident rather than the
road conditions, or the driver’s state of mind. Ethically
speaking my team would have to make the breaks work
under extreme conditions for it to be ethically correct in our
time period. There have been many recorded events where a
car that has not been made in preparation for the worst case
GATHERING OUTSIDE OPINIONS
It was not too long ago that our company was in hot
water over what many call “diesel gate”. Volkswagen
officials revealed that they implemented software inside the
vehicles that showed a false amount of diesel emission. This
hurt our company severely and we are now trying to be
completely honest with the public. [6]. If many people die
because of a faulty transmission system in extreme
temperatures our company may as well be known as a fake
and lying company and consumers would no longer trust our
2
Francisc Grigore
scenario sparks a recall. One important recall that would be
similar to my ethical dilemma would be the case of the Ford
Pinto. The Ford Pinto had the gas tank behind the rear axle
instead of above it which is a rather unusual design but the
engineers ignored it and went through with it. The Pinto
turned out to erupt in flames when rear-ended at high speeds.
A normal rear end collision would usually end up with the
back being crumpled up and the driver suffering whiplash or
minor injuries, however in the Pinto, every driver would be
engulfed in flames and would usually instantly die. Ford
initially stated that they would not do a recall and instead
offer to pay off any future lawsuits because it would end up
being cheaper for Ford. This was a great ethical debate at the
time because Ford essentially stated that they would rather
not recall the cars to fix them (for around $11 a car) and
instead pay for lawsuits and deaths. There was a big lawsuit
a few years later known as “Grimshaw vs. Ford Motor Co.”
and Ford got charged over 6 million dollars partially because
Ford knew of the design flaw and ignored it and then
released the product. [9]. Now if my team does not test for
extreme temperatures I can easily see the company going
into the same way Ford or Toyota went. Knowing a design
flaw and then not fixing it would be completely unethical
because you are directly killing people who happen to die in
those situations that you did not care to test. And that is why
I am highly leaning towards redesigning the transmission
system instead of taking a more convenient option.
Study).
http://www.onlineethics.org/Resources/Cases/AirBag.aspx
[4] (2014). “Public Health and Safety – Delay In Addressing
Fire Code Violations.” National Society of Professional
Engineers.
(Case
Study).
http://www.nspe.org/sites/default/files/BER%20Case%20No
%2013-11-FINAL.pdf
[5] “The Cost of Integrity.” Webguru. (Case Study).
http://www.webguru.neu.edu/professionalism/casestudies/cost-integrity
[6] D. Hakim, H. Tabuchi. (2015). “Volkswagen Test
Rigging Follows a Long Auto Industry Pattern.” New York
Times.
(Online
Blog).
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/24/business/international/
volkswagen-test-rigging-follows-a-long-auto-industrypattern.html
[7] S. Bowen. (2015). “Auto recall crisis, framing, and
ethical response: Toyota's missteps.” Public Relations
Review.
(Online
Article).
DOI:
10.1016/j.pubrev.2014.10.017. pp 40-49
[8] J. Wetmore. (2004). “Redefining Risks and
Redistributing Responsibilities: Building Networks to
Increase Automobile Safety.” Science, Technology, &
Human Values. (Print Article). pp 377-405
[9] M. Gladwell. (2015). “The Engineer's Lament.” New
Yorker.
(Online
Blog).
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/05/04/theengineers-lament
ADVICE TO FUTURE ENGINEERS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
A good piece of advice I received a while ago that I use
every time I have to decide between two options is: “Choose
whatever you will regret the least after you do it”. This is
useful in this decision because I would have much less regret
if I had to work overtime and finish a project past the
deadline rather than regretting that I chose to ignore a fatal
design flaw which caused some people to die. I would urge
all engineers to go over my advice and to also look over the
code of ethics when designing a new project mainly for the
safety and well-being of the public. Not only is it the right
thing to do but it is legally binding that all engineers follow
the code of ethics, I personally believe that if you do not
believe in some of the codes then you are fundamentally not
an engineer because you are not aiding society in the best
way.
I would like to thank the librarians who compiled a list of
databases for the freshman engineers to use and find
reputable sources for this paper. I would also like to thank
my girlfriend, Rachel, for going over my essay with me and
helping me fix grammar mistakes.
REFERENCES
[1]
“NSPE
Code
of
Ethics
for
Engineers.”
http://www.nspe.org/resources/ethics/code-ethics
[2]
“Code
of
Ethics
of
Engineers.”
ASME.
https://www.asme.org/getmedia/9EB36017-FA98-477E8A73-77B04B36D410/P157_Ethics.aspx
[3] (2013). “Air Bags, Safety, and Social Experiments.”
Online Ethics Center for Engineering and Science. (Case
3
Francisc Grigore
4