UNIT III: ENGINEERING AS

SOCIAL EXPERIMENTATION
Unit III : Engineering as Social Experimentation Engineering as experimentation Engineers as responsible experimenters Codes of ethics A balanced outlook on law The Challenger case study Bhopal Gas Tragedy The Three Mile sland and Chernobyl case studies!

ENGINEERING AS EXPERIMENTATION
Experimentation (Preliminary tests or Simulations) plays a vital role in the design of a product or process. In all stages of converting a new engineering concept into a design, like first rough cut design, usage of different types of materials and processes, detailed design, further stages of work design and the finished product, Experiments and tests are conducted to evaluate the product. odifications are made !ased on the outcome of these experiments.

 "he normal design process is thus iterative (modifications !eing made on the !asis of feed!ack information ac#uired from the tests). Even though various tests and experiments are conducted at various stages, the engineering pro$ect as a whole in its totality can !e viewed as an experiment.
SIMILARITIES TO STANDARD EXPERIMENTS %. &ny pro$ect is carried out in partial ignorance due to "he uncertainties in the a!stract model used for the design calculations, "he uncertainties in the precise characteristics of the materials purchased, "he uncertainties caused !y variations in processing and fa!rication of materials and "he uncertainties a!out the nature of stresses the finished product will encounter. Indeed, Engineer's success lies in the ability to accomplish tasks with only a partial knowledge of scientific laws a!out nature and society. (. "he final outcome of engineering pro$ects, like those of experiments, is generally uncertain. )ery often,

possi!le outcomes are not even known and great risks may !e presented which could never !e thought of.

*. Effective Engineering relies upon knowledge gained a!out products !oth !efore and after they leave the factory + knowledge needed for improving current products and creating !etter ones. "hat is, ongoing success in engineering depends upon gaining new knowledge.

LEARNING FROM THE PAST

Engineers should learn not only from their own earlier design and operating results, !ut also from other engineers. Engineers repeat the past mistakes of others due to the following reasons. ,ack of esta!lished communication. channels of

isplaced pride in not asking for information

Em!arrassment at failure or fear of litigation (legal pro!lems) -egligence.

Examples: %. "he Titanic lacked sufficient num!er of life !oats resulting in the death of %.(( out of (((/ (life !oat capacity availa!le was only 0(.), a few decades later Arctic perished due to the same pro!lem. (. In 1une %233, a section of the ilford 4aven 5ridge in 6ales collapsed during construction. & !ridge of similar design, erected !y the same !ridge+ !uilder in el!ourne, &ustralia, also partially collapsed in the month of 7cto!er, same year. 8uring this incident ** people were killed and many were in$ured. *. alfunctions occurred at nuclear reactors at various locations and the information reports were with 5a!cock and 6ilcox, the reactor manufacturer. In spite of these, no attention was paid leading to a pressure relief valve giving rise to the "hree ile Island nuclear accident on arch (0, %2/2. CONTRASTS WITH STANDARD EXPERIMENTS 1. EXPERIMENTAL CONTROL: In standard experiments, mem!ers are in two different groups. em!ers of one group receive special experimental treatment. "he other group mem!ers, called 9 control

group do not receive special treatment, though they are from the same environment in all other respects. 5ut this is not true in engineering, since most of the experiments are not conducted in la!oratories. "he su!$ects of experiments are human !eings who are outside the experimenter's control. "hus it is not possi!le to study the effects of changes in varia!le on different groups. 4ence only historical and retrospective data availa!le a!out various target groups has to !e used for evaluation. 4ence engineering as a social experimentation seems to !e an extended usage of the concept of experimentation. 2. INFORMED CONSENT: has two elements, knowledge and voluntariness. "he su!$ects (human !eings) should !e given all the information needed to make a reasona!le decision. -ext, they must get into the experiment without !eing su!$ected to force, fraud or deception. Supplying complete information is neither necessary nor in most cases possi!le. 5ut all relevant information needed for making a reasona!le decision on whether to participate should !e conveyed. ;enerally, we all prefer to !e the su!$ect of our own experiments rather than those of some!ody else. <onditions defining Informed or alid !onsent a. "he consent is given voluntarily

!. "he consent is !ased on information a rational person would want, together with any other information re#uested and presented to them in understanda!le form. c. "he consenter was competent to process the information and make rational decisions. d. Information has !een widely disseminated. e. "he su!$ect's consent is offered !y proxy !y a group that collectively represents many su!$ects like interests, concerns and exposure to risk. 9Engineering experiments are not conducted to gain new knowledge unlike scientific experiments'. Is this distinction necessary= "his distinction is not vital !ecause we are concerned about the manner in which the experiment is conducted, such as valid consent of human su!$ects !eing sought, safety measures taken and means exist for terminating the experiment at any time and providing all participants a safe exit.
Engineering a !"ia# e$%eri&en'a'i!n:

"he o!$ective of engineering is to solve pro!lems using technology which often involves unknowns like uncertain outcome monitor, learn from past experiments human su!$ects > participants often unaware, uninformed often don?t recogni@e all varia!les natural experiment Experimentation on the hand has the o!$ective of new knowledge or answers which also involves uncertain outcome, test hypothesis

draw conclusions or verify hypothesis !ased on experience > evidence Ainformed consentA of su!$ects try to control all varia!les controlled experiment

Experiments are carried out in partial ignorance when outcomes are uncertain like when engineers are asked to make things work without all the availa!le scientific knowledge(including that a!out humans), safety facts, environment, health, social influences, etc. or when ;ood design relies on information gathered !efore and after a product leaves the factory especially when the product is tested in its true Benvironment,C not fake ones used to simulate the real environment (e.g., temperature cycling electronic products) Dole of Experimentation in the 8esign Process: E Preliminary tests or simulations of concepts E <omponents and modules tested prior to detailed design E <ycle of test and modification through production E 5eyond specific elements of design, each pro$ect taken in a totality can !e viewed as an experiment <ontri!utors to Experimental -ature of Pro$ects: E Pro$ect carried out in partial ignorance F Parts functionality G availa!ility F ,uxury of waiting until all relevant facts are in not availa!le (a!ility to work with partial knowledge is one talent crucial to an engineer's success) E 7utcomes of pro$ects are generally uncertain F Hnknown risk may attend even a seemingly !enign pro$ect E Effective engineering depends on knowledge gained !oth !efore and after products are released F onitoring cannot !e limited to in+house development Informed <onsent: E Ieystone of properly conducted experiments involving human su!$ects E ain elements: F )olunteerism: a!sence of force, fraud, or deception F Inowledge: all the information needed to make a reasona!le decision (not $ust what they re#uest) F <ompetence: consenter is competent to process the information and make rational decisions orally Desponsi!le Engineers as Social Experimenters: E & primary o!ligation to protect the safety of human su!$ects and respect their right of consent E & constant awareness of experimental nature of any pro$ect, forecasting and monitoring side effects E &utonomous, personal involvement in all steps of a pro$ect E &ccepting accounta!ility for the results of a pro$ect 4ow this Earmarks a BStyleC of Engineering:

<onscientiousness F people act responsi!ly to the extent that they conscientiously commit themselves to live according to moral values. F oral values transcend a consuming preoccupation with narrowly conceived self+interest F & sense of awareness is implied F & role as a social guardian !ut not to suggest that engineers force, paternalistically, their own views of the social good upon society E Delevant Information F conscientiousness !lind without factual information F oral concern involves a commitment to o!tain and properly assess all availa!le information F 7!ligation to grasp the context (uses) of one's work F Since our vision is limited and pro$ects are experimental, ongoing monitoring is crucial E oral &utonomy F authenticity in moral conduct and principles F Iant: oral !eliefs and attitudes held on the !asis of critical reflection rather than passive adoption F <ommitment to action (not a!stract or merely ver!al) F Professional Societies such as IEEE can !e a source of employee moral support E &ccounta!ility F acceptance of moral responsi!ility for their actions F 6illing to su!mit one's actions to moral scrutiny F 7pen and responsive to assessment of others F 6illing to present morally cogent reason for one's conduct F Desistant to a narrowed sense of accounta!ility when working under external authority that may promote fragmentation, diffusion, meeting schedules, and limited roles <ommitment to Safety A thing is safe if, were its risks fully known, those risks would be "udged acceptable by a reasonable person in light of settled value principles. E$a&%#e : E <omputers: F 8eveloped G adopted over a!out three decades F Significant impacts on society: E -ot well understood or nor always predicted, e.g: F "he J(I !ug F 4owever largely accepted as a positive technology E -uclear power stations F 8eveloped G adopted over a!out three decades F Significant impacts on society: E -ot well understood nor always predicted, eg. <herno!yl F 6idespread concern G installed capacity in decline E$%eri&en'a# A''ri()'e !* Engineering: E Incomplete understanding of implications: F Insufficient time or money F <ommercial advantage (desire for secrecy) F Hncertainty a!out impacts (sometimes unknowa!le) E Participation of experimental su!$ects:

F Products or services often target non+engineers F Su!$ects share responsi!ility if voluntarily accept risk E Deasons for monitoring outcomes: F <ommercial purposes (e.g. product improvement) F Precautionary purposes (e.g. manage risk) Na')re !* S)(+e"' E Su!$ects: F Individual consumers, groups or society as a whole: E "hose who can make informed choices, and E "hose re#uiring advocates: F 8isadvantaged, future generations, other species G the environment E Impacts: F 4ealth, safety G the environment F <hanges to social structure G social status: E Income G wealth distri!ution E ,ifestyles G personal empowerment E Education, culture Fea')re E &!sence of a 9control group' ( e#uivalent non+participants): F Products G services usually offered to all F 5enefits may such that they can't !e withheld from a particular group E Society may have little prior understanding: F Innovative products G services F Hncertainty in future impacts (positive or negative) E Informed $udgements are difficult to make: F Kor !oth experimenter and su!$ect

Engineer a Re %!n i(#e E$%eri&en'er

Engineers are the main technical persons not sole experimenters. "he four general feature of responsi!le engineers are: 1. Conscientiousness 2. Relevant information ,. Moral autonomy -. Accountability

!onscientiousness: & primary o!ligation to protect the safety of human su!$ects and respect their right of consent. #elevant information: & constant awareness of the experimental nature of any pro$ect, imaginative forecasting of its possi!le side effects and a reasona!le effort to monitor them. $oral autonomy: &utonomous, personal involvement in all steps of the pro$ect. Accountability: &ccepting accounta!ility for the results of the pro$ect. CONSCIENTIOUSNESS: <onscientious moral commitment means sensitivity to the full range of relevant moral values. Sensitivity to responsi!ilities that is relevant.

6illingness to develop the skill and expend the effort needed to reach the !est !alance possi!le among these considerations. <onscientiousness means consciousness !ecause mere intent is not sufficient.

EngineerLs should act as guardians of the pu!lic interest, in that they are duty !ound to guard the welfare and safety of those affected !y engg pro$ects. RELE.ANT INFORMATION: <onscientiousness is !lind without relevant factual information. oral concern involves a commitment to o!tain and assess all availa!le pertinent information. &nother dimension to factual information is the conse#uences of what one does. 6hile regarding engg as social experimentation points out the importance of context, it also urges the engineer to view his or her speciali@ed activities in a pro$ect as part of a larger whole having a social impact that may involve a variety of unintended effects. It may !e !etter to practice 9defensive engg' (<hauncy Starr) or 9preventive engg' (Duth 8avis). MORAL AUTONOM/ People are morally autonomous when their moral conduct and principles of action are their own. oral !eliefs and attitudes must !e a critical reflection and not a passive adoption of the particular conventions of one's society, religion or profession.

 oral !eliefs and attitudes cannot !e agreed to formally and adhered to merely ver!ally. "hey must !e integrated into the core of one's personality and should lead to committed action. It is wrong to think that as an employee when one performs 9acts serving company's interests, one is no longer morally and personally identified with one's actions )iewing engg as a social experimentation helps to overcome this flawed thought and restores a sense of autonomous participation in one's work. &s an experimenter, an engineer is exercising the speciali@ed training that forms the core of one's identity as a professional. & social experiment that can result in unknown conse#uences should help inspire a critical and #uestioning attitude a!out the ade#uacy of current economic and safety standards. In turn, this leads to !etter personal involvement with work. ACCOUNTA0ILIT/:

 Desponsi!le people accept moral responsi!ility for their actions. &ccounta!ility is the willingness to su!mit one's actions to moral scrutiny and !e open and responsive to the assessment of others. It should !e understood as !eing culpa!le and !lameworthy for misdeeds. Su!mission to an employer's authority creates in many people a narrow sense of accounta!ility for the conse#uences of their action. "his is !ecause of i) 7nly a small contri!ution is made !y one individual, when large scale engineering work is fragmented. "he final product which is far away from one's immediate workplace, does not give a proper understanding of the conse#uences of one's action. ii) 8ue to the fragmentation of work, a vast diffusion of accounta!ility takes place. "he area of personal accounta!ility is delimited to the portion of work !eing carried out !y one. iii) "he pressure to move on to another new pro$ect does not allow one to complete the o!servations long enough. "his makes people accounta!le only for meeting schedules and not for the conse#uences of action.

iv) "o avoid getting into legal issues, engineers tend to concentrate more on legal lia!ilities than the containment of the potential risks involved in their area of work. )iewing engineering as a social experimentation makes one overcome these difficulties and see the pro!lem in whole rather than as part.
Ca e ')1ie 2*r!& ')1en' 3 *!r Engineering a S!"ia# E$%eri&en'a'i!n S!*'4are S')1en': BI was involved in designing and testing network communication software. Some tests were still !eing run when clients re#uested the software. 6e were una!le to finish the tests, and gave the product to the customer knowing that the system caused lock+ups and loss of data. 6e then used the feed!ack from these clients to de!ug the software, and repeated the process.C Similar student case: AIn software engineering I have encountered pro!lems in that the time re#uired for testing the product and the deadline for testing may conflict, and some parts of the testing may have to !e compromised to meet those deadlines. C!&%)'er 'e 'ing S')1en': B7n a recent co+op $o! my company had $ust shipped its latest and greatest computer product. &fter a few months in the field it was found to vastly lack the processor power it needed to do what it claimed to do. "he fix that followed had to have the shortest turn around time I had ever seen. "he fix was top #uality, !ut the damage had !een done. & full scale test, or even simulation, would have predicted this pro!lem !efore shipping.C 6hat should the co+op do= "rust specifications of other's su!components= Meeting specifications S')1en': B&t my co+op position I was placed in a design team to create an audio system. "he pro$ect was a classic example of marketing wanting the product so !ad that time lines were regarded higher than the #uality of the product. "he audio system?s first prototypes arrived

with many pro!lems, some of which could not !e resolved until after the product was released. It !asically came down to the decision of letting the consumers find all the pro!lems, and then hoping that the management would provide the team with more time and funding to fix the pro!lems, to try to keep the customers happy.C 6hat to do= En5ir!n&en' S')1en': B& tur!idity meter was used to monitor if contaminants were getting into the water that goes into the river. 6hen those meters failed to alarm us, and a white pigment went into the river, my pro$ect that focused on redesigning the monitoring station was given support.C <an>should the engineer do anything= <reative solutions= En5ir!n&en'...S')1en': BIn wastewater treatment plants, control systems are tested in the field. "he control systems are designed according to specifications and IS&>IEEE rules, !ut the testing of how the systems will operate under real life situations is done after installing them. "wo #uestions arise, then: first, can the plant design withstand additional rain, population increases, weather pro!lems, etc= Second, can the control system ade#uately analy@e these new factors and operate the plant successfully= If anything fails, the great danger is the release of raw sewage>sludge and !acteria onto land and into the water supply.C 6hat can the engineer do= 6ill competence solve the pro!lem= La46 &ini&a# "!&%#ian"e...S')1en': B y pro!lem came with a company involved in the design and manufacturing of P< power supplies. Some manufacturing organi@ations have focused on %MMN minimal compliance and hence su!stituted parts to achieve their cost o!$ectives. "his resulted in unsafe final consumer products. &n industry pushes for <S& and H, certification of power supply modules enhanced the minimal level achieved for standard su! assem!lies. Since the K<< and K"< act as police organi@ations, it is not usually known that there is a pro!lem until much mayhem occurs. 6hen other companies !egan selling Asmoking P<sA the industry !egan to push to use only modules which would meet H, and <S& standards. "he minimalists were forced to up the ante or lose considera!le !usiness.C

ENGINEERING CODES OF ETHICS

E'7i"a# "!1e are adopted !y organi@ations to assist mem!ers in understanding the difference !etween ?right? and ?wrong? and in applying that understanding to their decisions. &n ethical code generally implies documents at three levels: codes of !usiness ethics, codes of conduct for employees, and codes of professional practice. <ode of ethics for any profession is a guide of principles designed to help professionals conduct !usiness honestly and with integrity. & code of ethics document may outline the mission and values of the !usiness or organi@ation, how professionals are supposed to approach pro!lems, the ethical principles !ased on the organi@ation?s core values and the standards to which the professional will !e held. & statement encompassing the set of rules !ased on values and the standards of conduct to which practitioners of a profession are expected to conform can !ecome a code of ethics. Ethics code is generally different from code of conduct pertaining to discipline and personal moral !ehavior. 5oth are distinct !ut can overlap.

Engineering <odes of Ethics have evolved over time

EARL/ CODES
E E

<odes of personal !ehavior

<odes for honesty in !usiness dealings and fair !usiness practices

E

Employee>employer relations NEWER CODES

Emphasi@e commitments to safety, pu!lic health and environmental protection

Express the rights, duties and o!ligations of mem!ers of the Profession 8o not express new ethical principles, !ut coherently restate existing standards of responsi!le engineering practice <reate an environment within the Profession where ethical !ehavior is the norm -ot legally !indingO an engineer cannot !e arrested for violating an ethical code (!ut may !e expelled from or censured !y the engineering society)

Are Engineering Codes Needed8 NO: F Engineers are capa!le of fending for themselves <ommon law is availa!le to defend in ethical disputes
F F

7ffended pu!lic can seek redress through courts

Are Engineering Codes Needed8 /ES: F Engineers have few or no resources to defend themselves in an ethical dispute <ommon law is availa!le in reality only with great difficulty
F

<onversely, the pu!lic has similar pro!lems in seeking redress through legal channels
F

Objections to Existing Engineering Codes of Ethics:

Delatively few engineers are mem!ers of engineering societies. F -on+mem!ers don't necessarily follow the ethical codes. F any engineers either don't know that the codes exist, or have not read them.
F

%hich ethical codes apply& 8epending upon your discipline and organi@ational affiliations, you may !e !ound !y one, two or even more ethical codes: E 8iscipline related (&S E, IEEE, &S<E, IIE etc.) E -ational Society of Professional Engineers (-SPE) E Employee codes (corporation, university, etc.) E Hnion <odes
F

Engineering E'7i" C!1e 7ur engineering ethics codes are derived from a 6estern cultural tradition F &ncient ;reeks F 1udeo+<hristian religions F Philosophers and thinkers (e.g. ,ocke, Iant, ills)

T7e Ha&&)ra(i C!1e If a !uilder has !uilt a house for a man and has not made his work sound, and the house he has !uilt has fallen down and so caused the death of the householder, that !uilder shall !e put to death. If it causes the death of the householder's son, they shall put the !uilder's son to deathP. (4ammura!i, Iing of 5a!ylon, %/.0 5.<.) C!1e !* E'7i" *!r Engineer &ccreditation 5oard for "echnology(&5E") "he Kundamental Principles Engineering and

Engineers shall uphold and advance the integrity, honor, and dignity of the engineering profession !y:

using their knowledge and skill for the enhancement of the human race'
E

being honest and impartial and serving with fidelity ( the public, their employers, and clients'
E

striving to increase the competence and prestige of the engineering profession.

E

supporting the professional and technical societies of their discipline.

E

T7e F)n1a&en'a# Cann!n

Engineers, in the fulfillment of their professional duties, shall:

). *old paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public in the performance of their professional duties' +. ,erform service only in areas of their competence' -. Issue public statements only in an ob"ective and truthful manner' .. Act in professional matters for each employer or client as faithful agents or trustees, and shall avoid conflicts of interest' /. 0uild their professional reputations on the merits of their services and shall not compete unfairly with others 1. Act in such manner as to uphold and enhance the honor, integrity and dignity of the profession' 2. !ontinue their professional development throughout their careers, and shall provide opportunities for the professional development of those engineers under their supervision. RO E! !* CODES 1. In %ira'i!n an1 G)i1an"e:

 <odes provide positive stimulus for ethical conduct and helpful guidance !y using positive language. <odes should !e !rief to !e effective and hence such codes offer only general guidance. Supplementary statements or guidelines to give specific directions are added !y a num!er of societies or professional !odies. (. S)%%!r': <odes give positive support to those seeking to act ethically. &n engineer under pressure to act unethically can use one of the pu!licly proclaimed codes to get support for his stand on specific moral issues. <odes also serve as legal support for engineers. ,. De'erren"e an1 1i "i%#ine: <odes can !e used as a !asis for conducting investigations on unethical conduct. "hey also provide a deterrent for engineers to act immorally. Engineers who are punished !y professional societies for proven unethical !ehaviour !y revoking the rights to practice as engineers are also su!$ected to pu!lic ridicule and loss of respect from colleagues and local community.

 "his helps to produce ethical conduct even though this can !e viewed as a negative way of motivation. -. E1)"a'i!n an1 &)')a# )n1er 'an1ing: "he codes can !e used for discussion and reflection on moral issues and there!y improve the understanding of moral responsi!ilities among all engineers, clients, pu!lic and good organi@ations.
9. C!n'ri()'ing '! '7e %r!*e i!n: %)(#i" i&age:

<odes present the engineering profession as an ethically committed society in the eyes of the pu!lic thus enhancing their image. ;. Pr!'e"'ing 'a') <)!: <odes esta!lish ethical conventions, which can help promote an agreed upon minimum level of ethical conduct. =. Pr!&!'ing () ine in'ere ' : <odes can place unwarranted restraints of commerce on !usiness dealings. Re#a'i5e i&%!r'an"e !* '7e 5ari!) *)n"'i!n !* "!1e !* e'7i" "he perspective of engg as social experimentation clearly emphasi@es the primary role 9supportive function' of the codes of ethics. "his is so !ecause, only this support ena!les

engineers, speak out clearly and openly their views, to those affected !y engg pro$ects. "he, 9inspiration and guidance' and 9educative' functions are also important in promoting mutual understanding and in motivating engineers to act with higher moral standards. "he 9disciplinary' function in engg codes is of secondary importance. "hose with unethical conduct when exposed are su!$ect to law. 8eveloping ela!orate paralegal procedures within professional societies duplicates a function which can !e done !etter !y legal system. &t !est, codes should try to discipline engineers in areas which are not covered !y law. "he worst a!use of codes has !een to restrict honest moral effort in the name of 9preserving profession's pu!lic mage' and 9protecting status #uo'. "he !est way to increase trust is !y encouraging and aiding engineers to speak freely and responsi!ly a!out pu!lic safety. imitations !* C!1e !* E'7i" %. <odes are restricted to general and vague wording. "hey cannot !e straightaway applied to all situations. (. It is easy for different clauses of codes to come into conflict with each other.

*. "hey cannot serve as the final moral authority for professional conduct. .. The current codes are by no means perfect but are definitely steps in the right direction. .. "he government can violate the laws when they think they can get away with it, to face them in lengthy and costly court proceedings. "his also creates frustration with the law.
NSPE CODE OF ETHICS FOR ENGINEERS 3N!"E: National !ociety of "rofessional Engineers4 Prea&(#e Engineering is an important and learned profession. &s mem!ers of this profession, engineers are expected to exhi!it the highest standards of honesty and integrity. Engineering has a direct and vital impact on the #uality of life for all people. &ccordingly, the services provided !y engineers re#uire honesty, impartiality, fairness, and e#uity, and must !e dedicated to the protection of the pu!lic health, safety, and welfare. Engineers must perform under a standard of professional !ehavior that re#uires adherence to the highest principles of ethical conduct.

A 0ALANCED OUTLOO> ON LAW

"he %232 Santa 5ar!ara offshore spill of (*.,MMM gallons of crude oil !lackened *M miles of spectacular !eaches, damaged wildlife, and hurt the local tourist trade. Predicta!ly, the disaster prompted demands for new laws and tighter controls to prevent such occurances in the future. & group of Southern <alifornians staged a !urning of gasoline credit cards of the offending

oil company. Hnion oil is only to !e taken to task !y a local newspaper for taking the wrong aim. "he newspaper argued that gas station operators who would suffer the most !y a !oycott are not at fault. 7ne may learn some on+the+$o!. 7ne may likely to learn some Bindustrial standards,C some of which directly pertain to safety. "endency toward more detail will !e lacking. Is minimal compliance morally accepta!le= 6hat a!out push of new technologies= &reas where there is no law= ;overnment>law can !e too detailed + can s#uash moral autonomy of engineers. 6e may have to look for good !alance. Some times $udges and government agencies interpret law: &fter offshore oil spills in Santa 5ar!ara in %232: the spills caused damage to the !eaches and sea life was it the fault of federal authorities for lack of enforcement= was it the drillers fault for not following laws= "he drillers argued that they did follow the law and should not !e penali@ed. 4ickel, a federal official, interpreted the law differently and was harsh to the drillers. 4e wanted to get the drillers attention. 4e was mad at the drillers. 4e said you have to 9hit the polluters hard so they don't pollute again' . "hat is 4ickel's law : 9hit the polluters hard so they don't do it again'. 4ickel's law gives extra harsh penalty to get attention

and avoid others doing the same thing. It allows protection for those that can not protect themselves. 6hy is 4ickel's law important= in this case it is protection for the environment and local !eaches and sea life the drillers met the minimum re#uirement, !ut the federal officials were still mad a!out the em!arrassment caused to them !y the accident the drillers were penali@ed. it is an example of why the minimum compliance is sometimes not enough other terms for minimum compliance could !e: following the minimum standard, minimum law, or minimum re#uirement inimum compliance + what does it mean= o someone follows the law, !ut doing not more than is re#uired o doing the minimum in order to not !reak the law, o satisfying the minimum re#uirement, o following the minimum standard o examples of the "ampa 5ay 5ridge, "itanic, 4ickle's ,aw, cPherson case illustrate why the law, or minimum compliance, is not enough

o minimum compliance makes companies risk !eing su!$ect to 94ickle's ,aw o old attitudes such as 9!uyer !eware' are consistent with thought a!out following the 9minimum re#uirement' or 9minimum compliance'