One project, two clients 1

[glass99]

Is there a rule or ethical restriction on a consulting engineer working for multiple parties on the one built object as a professional engineer? For example, is it acceptable if I am engaged by an architect to design a glass stair, and I write a performance specification which then gets picked up by a contractor who wants to hire me to provide detailed PE stamped structural calculations for the stair including all the detailed connection? This issue comes up for me all the time in all kinds of ways. I have two such requests outstanding from contractors wishing to hire me.

Section 137.63.c.5 of the Texas Professional Engineering Practice Act apparently prohibits this behavior to some extent, though unsure what it means in practice.

​

" The engineer shall not:.....accept compensation or benefits from more than one party for services pertaining to the same project or assignment..."

 

[hokie66]

That sounds like a legal requirement in Texas, but I don't see it as an ethical problem, as long as all parties are aware of the arrangement. In today's world, where preliminary designs are then often novated to successful tenderers, the firm who developed the concept would be unfairly discriminated against if not allowed to do the final design.

 

[glass99]

hokie66: thanks. I don't think its a conflict of interest either so long as the original client agrees that you are providing an objective technical service like weld sizing calculations. If they are expecting the PE to play more of an advocate role such as expert witnessing, I feel like that could be different. Interestingly, the Texas rules don't restrict expert witness service offerings.

I am not in TX btw, i just ran across this rule recently.

 

[MrHershey]

Is not unusual. A lot of times we'll specify something as pre-engineered. Whether that's metal stairs or cold-formed metal roof trusses or cold-formed framing or whatever. Then contractor can choose whomever they like to do the design for them. Sometimes they like the designer for the overall building. Sometimes they don't and go find someone else (and hopefully not just wing it). Similar deal when we require on our general notes that contractor retain a licensed structural engineer to design their shoring for them.

Not a conflict of interest or unethical unless you had committed to that portion of the design under the scope of work in your original contract with owner/architect and then renege and put it on the contractor. Just delegating the design to the contractor who can then decide how they want to deal with it.

 

[glass99]

MarkHirschi - thanks. The argument for a contractor rehiring the original engineer is frequently one of efficiency. If an engineer has been on the project for a year or more already, they have a degree of familiarity which a new engineer will not.

 

[JAE]

I guess I'd take the contrarian view here.
We've had this issue arise with our firm - part of which designs buildings as the EOR and another part of our firm does precast concrete design and detailing work for precast companies.

I believe that there IS at least an appearance of a conflict of interest with multiple clients on the same project. And even the appearance of a conflict is often frowned upon in many engineering ethics standards.

If you communicate to all parties (owner and contractor) that you are providing services to both on the same project, then you perhaps have at least avoided a sense of conflict by getting everyone to agree that you can provide these services professionally.

However you now have two clients that you owe full professional duty to on the same project and for the same work and as a result you have the appearance of a conflict of interest.
If issues arise during construction between the owner and the contractor, you would be in the middle of it all with a very real conflict of interest.

You might not personally see a conflict yourself, as you would most likely just provide facts and unbiased opinions, but that doesn't change the fact that you have the appearance of a conflict.

Here's a couple of segments of the NSPE Code of Ethics (USA)
[blue]4. Engineers shall act for each employer or client as faithful agents or trustees.
1. Engineers shall disclose all known or potential conflicts of interest that could influence or appear to influence their judgment or the quality of their services.
2. Engineers shall not accept compensation, financial or otherwise, from more than one party for services on the same project, or for services pertaining to the same project, unless the circumstances are fully disclosed and agreed to by all interested parties.

5. Engineers shall not be influenced in their professional duties by conflicting interests.
1. Engineers shall not accept financial or other considerations, including free engineering designs, from material or equipment suppliers for specifying their product.
2. Engineers shall not accept commissions or allowances, directly or indirectly, from contractors or other parties dealing with clients or employers of the engineer in connection with work for which the engineer is responsible.[/blue]


Check out Eng-Tips Forum's Policies here:
faq731-376

 

[glass99]

JAE - thanks. I feel like those Code of Ethics rules were written in ye olden days when everything was strictly design-bid-build, not the design-build model we often have theses days.

 

[JAE]

I'm not sure ethical principals change all that much over time.



Check out Eng-Tips Forum's Policies here:
faq731-376

 

[glass99]

As a matter of reference, my old boss was a stickler for not working for more than one client on a job, which is a practice I have carried forward, though it is becoming increasingly challenging to do so.