The mechanism and confidentiality of raising a concern about professional misconduct is a great topic for the IET/IMechE/RAeS to consider.


​I contacted the RAeS about concerns with one of its members. They were helpful but I could not provide the evidence to support a proper investigation as it was covered by the employing company's IPR and security agreements (not unreasonably). The internal investigation was less than thorough (non of the effected people were interviewed or relevant documents examined). At this stage, there needs to be a mechanism for "trusted" people from the institutions to be allowed to investigate to provide independent, third-party assessments. That way, both the employers and the people involved would be assured that reasonable efforts had been taken, regardless of the eventual outcome.

Hello Ken:


In order to resolve the potential legal problems  I have taken another direction.


First thing is that a person is assumed to be innocent until convicted in a court of law for either a criminal or civil offense.


After conviction I contact the IET legal department to determine if that person was a member.


If the person is a IET member then the evidence from the trial can be used to disbar the member.


However there is a problem with this procedure-


The IET is governed by the laws of England and Wales and the conviction in another country (example USA) may be something that is not applicable in the UK.


By the way I consider the implications of the VW diesel emission scandal goes far beyond it's initial impact - it has long range effects on manufacturing of both hardware and associated software.


 Peter Brooks

In response to Peter's post... No I am not suggesting that the IET and other professional bodies deal with all grievances between employer and employee. I would hope that responsible employers would have appropriate internal processes to deal with general grievances.  However, having said that the IET and volunteer members could potentially act as independent arbitrators in cases where an employer's processes have failed to get a result that all parties would accept. Is that a function that IET members may value?


The point of my original post was to ask if there was support for engineers to help them do the right thing more easily / confidently if they find themselves in business situations that are ethically wrong, against the public interest, or even worse has the potential to compromise the safety of either other employees, the consumer, or the general public.


I have found the following on the IET website:
http://www.theiet.org/membership/career/ethics/whistleblowing-members.cfm


It says that the IET has limited scope to support members who may decide to speak up / whistle blow. Could the IET potentially do more to provide support?


I don't like the term 'whistleblowing' as it seems negative and kind of implies that you are betraying your employer / organisation. The opposite is true I think. By speaking up and ensuring that your employer does the 'right thing' - be that ethically or from a safety point of view - you are actually trying to protect the reputation of the employer (as well as subsequent and long term financial implications).


Some organisations already have very good procedures in place for whistleblowing and speaking up (and anti-retaliation policies). However, I think we could do more to try and get a higher percentage of organisations operating in a similar way.


Could the IET / ECUK / Others issue some kind of code or basic procedural suggestion for enabling ALL employees to speak up when they see something wrong. It could involve some kind of audit / confirmation that an organisation has these channels / procedures in place and then the organisation is awarded a mark or badge to say that they have suitable procedures. A bit like the 'Investors in People' award or ISO9001 certification. In fact, could such a 'speaking up' procedure / facility be written in to the ISO9001 standard as a requirement for being certified as ISO9001 compliant?


Just some ideas.

Hello Jason:


I assume that a company the size of VW had the necessary written procedures in place to cover unethical behavior, but it failed to stop the dieselgate emission fraud.


I have written internal company procedures in support of IS9000 certification and audited companies in the US, Asia, Europe and the UK against defined quality requirements. Deeply hidden ethical problems will be not be uncovered in the short time allowed for these audits.


Bottom line is having written procedures cover ethics issues does not guarantee that the company will follow them.


Peter Brooks MIET

Palm Bay Florida USA 

Peter,

Agreed. Written procedures on its own won't solve the problem. It requires a suitable company culture and that could take time and intentional effort from the senior leaders to embed.

However, having a good written procedure and internal lines of communication could be a starting point on that path.

Jason, You have more faith than I do, regarding senior company leaders, following their defined ethical rules. 


There has to be a sword over their heads (example fines and imprisonment) for failure to follow them.


Peter Brooks MIET

Hello Jason:


Now we are finally getting into the next phase of the mess started by the VW's emissions scandal.


It was reported in the US New York Times tonight that the BMW Munich Headquarters was raided on October 16, 2017.


This legal investigation deals with potential Antitrust violations,, and also involves VW.


Peter Brooks MIET 

Palm Bay Florida USA