Introduction Mary Johnson, who was at that time a


In the past
years, ‘Aspire Engineering Company’ has seen its disaster that is reduced its
image as a well-known engineering company. Where there was a civil engineer
specializing in structural design called Mary Johnson, who was at that time a
fresh graduate.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

she had some problems with her first project as a leader in this company. She
designs a parking structure in an area where the soil is poor.She request a
detailed soil report but the geotechnical engineer recommend to continuous
footing. Then the design was reviewed by another engineer where he accepted and
signed it.

At the
construction stage, she was harassed by the observerand the construction
workers. She faced many pressures that affected her decisions as an engineer. When
she noticed that there were problems facing them in the construction, she told
the observerand warned him of her fears, but he didn’t listen to her.

distrust of herself, her decision, and the submission of the observeropinion,
were the reasonsto fall into troubles.


The analysis and discussion of the situation

Mary was
proud to receive her approval to start her project. She was committed to her
duty as an engineer;go to the work site to record data, and the important
information during the preparation of the site. But she was harassed by
construction workers and this made her uncomfortable, but she tried to overcome

On the first
day of pouring concrete, Mary was present at the site to take samples of the
concrete and do her duties.

When Mary
noticed some problems, she told her observerabout her fears. But the observerdidn’t
give importance to her fears and told her that she had no experience in
construction. Mary didn’t stop and she went to the office to tell the owner and
those who were more experienced about the situation but without interest, they
just gave her information and advice on construction.

According to
ASCE code of ethics:”Ensuring Legal Compliance” Maryfollows
it.Where she committed to her professional duties, and confirmed her

But for the
actions of construction workers,observer, and the members of the work, their
behavior was not moral and they broke the laws.

And according
to ASCE code of ethics:”Workplace Quality”, they didn’t
follow.They must respect each other; the harassment is
illegal and it’sshould not be tolerated.

The next day
after finishing pouring half of the concrete the batch plant breaks down and
the trucks stop coming. Mary spoke with the observer about this problem and
that after two hours of pouring the concrete it will begin to set up and will
not bond well with newly poured concrete. The observer also did not respond to
Mary’s words and told her not worry. Mary continued to say that they should
remove the pouring concrete and not leave it because this would cause
problems.Mary tried with the observer but he abused her teaching and knowledge
about the construction.

reaction to this situation was good and she tried to have her opinion heard,
but the insistence of the observer and his insulted to Mary, made her take a
wrong decision she was not convinced and satisfied on it and this is Mary’s
mistake, could not keep her opinion and didn’t trust her abilities and herself,
howdid she want the observer and the workers to trust her?

From the
beginning, Mary represented the image of the moral professional engineer who
walks behind the basics of geometric ethics but the pressure of the observer,
which prevented her from thinking what is the right decision and what are the
effects that will happen in the future behind this decision.

According to
code of ethics:CANON 3 ” Engineers when serving as expert
witnesses, shall express an engineering opinion only when it is founded upon
adequate knowledge of the facts, upon a background of technical competence, and
upon honest conviction “.

So the
observer is transgressing this code;Mary was not allowed to express her
opinion, and the observer insisted not to hear herbecause he was thinkthat he is
better than Mary, although he didn’t examine the situation.


At the end Mary decides to trust the experience of the
observer and continue the pour, and this was her mistake she should not take
this decision because she wasn’t sure of it.

Two years
after the completion of the project, which finally appeared to be good and
trouble-free, a disaster occurred that the parking garage is severely damaged
in an earthquake. This has led to injuries and deaths, and people have raised
cases against the owner of the parking, contractor, and the company.

The engineer
and the observer didn’t think of the accidents that would happen to the people
behind this negligence and didn’t think about their safety. It was a priority
of the observer that do not listen to engineer Mary and he want to finish
thisworking as quickly as possible whatever the results, he was always thought that
he is the best and others are few and efficient knowledge.

On the other
hand, Mary’s attention was based on not hearing other words from the observer
and she was eventually satisfied with his orders.

According to
code of ethics:CANON 1 ” Engineers shall hold paramount the safety,
health, and welfare of the public and shall strive to comply with the
principles of sustainable development in the performance of their professional

investigatingthe case, it was identified that the reason for the fall of the parking
garage was a mistake that occurred in the construction phase when the concrete
is poured and that is known as ‘cold joint’.

In addition,
the owner of the garage admitted that cracks had appeared six months after the garage
was open, but he had resolved the issue without telling anyone he had told an
employee to fill the crack with driveway patching compound.


Mistakes that could have been avoided

From opinion, there was a mistake from the manager
when Mary went to tell him about her fears and problems that existed on the
site. It was better to send an engineer to check out these problems. It was
also better to change the observer of Mary with another to prevent the problems
that were occurring between them that caused problems in the work.

Engineer Mary, She should have been more courageous to
stop the observer and construction workers from saying the insults.

Engineer Mary,should not have made uncertain decisions
in difficult situations such as these, and should not let other opinions affect
her and doubther ability.








A professional employee, whatever his job, must be
competent, knowledgeable, possess a personal confidence, ethical, and more
important he must be committed to the laws and the code of his or her job.

A serious
and honest worker produces professional and complete work, not fall in mistakes
that hinder his progress. And the safety of the customer or the public is the
most important thing that should be in the mind, and before making any
decision, you must first make sure that it is safe or not.

The cods have
been developed to be followed for the safety of the employee and client, and
whoever violates thesecodes must be punished.