The Resort Invitation and the Failing Cores
You are the resident engineer on a 30 km rehabilitation contract. The contractor's project manager invites you to a two-day 'technical visit' at a lakeside resort, all expenses paid, and offers a new laptop 'to speed up site reporting.' He also offers to sponsor a road-safety training for your staff. In the same week, he submits interim payment certificate No. 12 for ETB 3.2 million covering asphalt concrete. Core test results show 3 of 5 cores below the 5 cm thickness (average 4.6 cm; lowest 4.1 cm) and field density at 96% against the specified 98%. Your supervisor calls and says: 'Approve it. The contractor is close to the minister; we can adjust it in the next IPC.' You also learn that the contractor's brother works in the ERA human resources directorate.
1. Identify the ethical issues and the principles that should guide your response.
Read the worked answer
The issues are conflict of interest (gifts, hospitality, future benefit), integrity of testing and certification, abuse of office, and pressure to commit fraud. The civil service code and ERA procurement rules prohibit accepting gifts or benefits that could influence judgement. The laptop and resort visit are benefits, not technical necessities; the training sponsorship creates dependency. The payment certificate covers nonconforming work: 3 of 5 cores are below thickness and density is 96% against the specified 98%. Certifying it would misrepresent the facts. 'Adjust next IPC' is not a remedy; it hides the defect and may breach the contract and audit rules.
Applicable principles are honesty, impartiality, transparency, accountability and the public interest. The contractor's brother in HR is a potential conflict only if he is involved in the decision, but disclose it anyway.
2. What should you do about the gifts and the interim payment certificate?
Read the worked answer
Gifts: Decline politely in writing. If refusal would cause offence or the item cannot be returned immediately, declare it to the ethics liaison officer and surrender it to the office asset register. Do not accept the training sponsorship without a written, transparent agreement approved by management; even then, it may create an appearance of favouritism.
IPC 12: Do not approve. Issue a nonconformance report, require the contractor to propose remedial work or accept a price reduction under the contract, and re-test after remediation. Copy the test results and your decision to the supervision consultant and the contract administration file. If the contractor disputes, follow the contract's dispute procedure. Ask the supervisor to confirm the instruction in writing: 'Please confirm that you direct approval of nonconforming work.' That protects you and tests the instruction. If the supervisor persists, report to the ethics committee or whistleblower channel.
3. How should you respond to the supervisor's pressure and document your position?
Read the worked answer
Document everything contemporaneously: date, time, the call and its exact words, and your response. Send a short email to the supervisor summarizing the discussion and the technical basis for rejection, and copy the file. Do not delete messages. If the supervisor is senior, use the chain of command but do not let the matter rest; the ERA ethics liaison, the Federal Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission hotline, or the auditor are options. Retaliation is a risk, so keep a personal record and seek advice from the professional association.
The public-interest test: a ETB 3.2 million payment for substandard asphalt could lead to early failure, safety risk and higher cost. The engineer's duty is to the employer and the public, not to a friendship between the contractor and a minister. If the supervisor's instruction is later used to justify payment, your written objection is the evidence that you did not concur.