In one recent case, the Board was faced with the question of whether an employment agreement prepared by an engineer who was hiring another engineer was ethical because it contained restrictive provisions that made it virtually impossible for the employee to be re-employed in the event he left the employer's service. The Board has also been faced with a situation involving an engineering expert that was retained by an attorney to serve as an expert for one party in litigation and then later sought to represent an adversary party in the same litigation. While some of these issues are fairly straight-forward and simple, other issues are more complex, requiring careful study and analysis. The NSPE Code of Ethics has always been viewed and dynamic document reflecting changes in engineering practice. While some of the modifications to the Code have come easily, reflecting a general consensus of opinion within the profession other changes have come as a result of conflict.
Some examples quickly come to mind.
For example in the mid-1980s during the liability insurance crisis, many engineer who had been performing professional services in connection with hazardous waste, pollution and other related services saw their professional liability insurance policies exclude these areas of practice from policy coverage. Professional liability insurance to protect against claims relating to these risks became impossible to obtain. After careful review and deliberation and in response to the growing need for adequate procedures to safeguard engineers against untoward professional liability exposure, the NSPE Board of Directors agreed to modify Code section III.9. This change reflects the fact that the Code is not a static document but a living document reflecting alternations in circumstances and practice. Another recent example of a case where the NSPE Code was modified to reflect changing practice relates to the issue of conflicts of interest and Section II.4.d.