Peter, for several years, has worked with Bigness Oil Company’s local affiliate and has established a strong and trusting relationship with Jesse, a manager of the local facility. On Peter’s recommendations, the facility has adhered to environmental ethics and is in good terms with the state regulatory agency. The facility gets supplied with various petrochemicals that get transported through tank trucks and pipelines. The products then get blended and resold to the private sector. Peter has been recommended by Jesse to remain as the corporate consulting engineer judging from his performance. The recommendation plays a significant role in the advancement of Peter and his consulting firm.
Jesse reveals to Peter about and oil spillage that occurred in the 1950s that involved a mysterious raw petrochemical. The findings of the leakages were found as a result of auditing books as, during those years, operations were lax. The plant manager conducted pressure tests on the pipelines and discovered that one that had destroyed and leaked 10000 gallons of oil into the ground. The plant stopped the leakage and conducted sample testing with sank observation and found out the product sat on a vertical plume that gradually diffused into a deep aquifer. The plant manager concluded on doing nothing since the property was far from ground or https://essaygroom.com/jesse-holman-jones-and-the-great-depression/water. Therefore, it did not pollute either. Another test established that wells within 400 feet were not in any way contaminated by the petrochemical, and the story never appeared in the press. Peter feels uneasy and faced with an ethical dilemma on the revelations that he sees that the spills should get reported to the state regulatory agencies. Again the spills occurred long ago, and the effects by now have dissipated for sure. Jesse argues that it is not necessary to report to the state agency as it is a past event that is pointless in following up. Again Jesse explains to Peter that the matter is in confidence, and it is a requirement in the engineering code of ethics to observe client confidentiality. Jesse complains that reporting the case would lead to company troubles and spending on a lost cause. Jesse states that Peter reporting the matter to the regulatory agency is not either kind to Peter’s engineering career or the environment and questions Peter’s loyalty as clientele. (Harris, Jr., Pritchard, James, Englehardt, and Rabins)
The respect for persons (RP) ethical approach demands the finding of fundamental ideas of conventional morality on imperative acting and respecting humans as equal and free moral agents. Persons following the approach are empowered to make a personal judgment after receiving information (Hackett and Gordon). They act this way since acting otherwise is a violation of research ethics and human rights. Therefore Peter, in this instance, is entitled to make his own voluntary decision on the spillage. The virtue of ethics morality finds that the original idea of common morality to be imperative to act is similar to that of a virtuous person. When moral and professional rules provide insufficient direct to moral motivation, understanding, and development, then the virtue ethics approach provides the guidelines. Peter is on the expectation of acting as a virtuous person by examining the moral codes required of him. When he truly understands that ethical motivations, then it is upon him to respond most appropriately. Jesse, on the other hand, clearly lacks the virtue of ethics, but on respect for persons, he gives out his own opinion on the matter as a free and equal moral human.
References
Hackett, R. D., and Gordon W. “Virtues and leadership.” Management Decision, 2012.
Harris, C. E. Jr., Pritchard, M. S., James, R. W., Englehardt, E. E., and Rabins, M. J. “Engineering Ethics: Concepts and Cases.” (6th Ed), Cengage Learning, 2019.