Response to case study scenario 1

Firstly, I will request a private meeting with a senior manager in my department in order to report, in simple terms, the test results and the possible safety issues. I will follow up with a written letter to the same effect as the meeting, to same manager. Secondly, I will confidentially consult professional bodies, peers and colleagues for their past experience and advice on what further action I should take to avoid any legal repercussions against myself. I will seek legal advice from a solicitor about my possible personal liability and legal responsibility. It is in the interests of all those involved that everyone acts within their frameworks of responsibility, in a disciplined and prompt manner.

In my experience, obtaining a second opinion from somebody independent from the situation helps resolve an issue. Going above an immediate boss is not a popular action to take, but I have a stronger duty to protect the people at risk than to maintain a good relationship with my manager.

I was once faced with a situation where a product that our R&D company was developing would conflict with an existing patent. I notified my immediate manager who quickly dismissed it. I requested a meeting with the departmental manager where I pointed out the similarities of the two products. Consequently, he spoke with my boss about our product and mentioned a patent he knew about and pointed out some similarities. The design of the system was changed to avoid a conflict, I maintained a good relationship with my manager and legal repercussions were avoided. In this case, someone who was held in higher regard was able to make an important concern to be taken more seriously.

I am not a manager, however, as a safety testing engineer I am placed under a professional duty to act in the safety of clients and prevent hazards. They were expecting to receive safe and fault-free products; however this is potentially not the case. I will take all the steps I feel necessary given my role in the company. Personally, I consider a 1.5% failure rate unacceptable given the potential hazard posed by a failure; however I have also taken into consideration the unlikely possibility that many, if any, of the products have actually reached, and are being used by, the customers.

I will not act irrationally and allow management to look after the situation. As an employee it is in my interests to prevent damage to the reputation of the company: a serious incident and a legal case over negligence would tarnish the reputation for years to come. Consequently, I will not take it upon myself to make the issue public.