Ir Siow Yun Tong

About

how moral outcomes can be achieved

in specific situations.
From which the focus shall be on
engineering ethics as a start.
From thereon, others such as environmental
ethics will also be discussed.
These ethics are practiced widely in the
industry.

A German university has voted to strip Education Minister

Annette Schavan of her doctorate after an investigation
into plagiarism allegations.
The University of Duesseldorf's philosophy faculty
decided on Tuesday that she had carried out "a deliberate
deception through plagiarism".
The minister has denied the claims and said she will
appeal.
Source: BBC News Online

Engineering ethics is the field of applied

ethics and system of moral principles that
apply to the practice of engineering.
The field examines and sets the obligations
by engineers to society, to their clients, and
to the profession.

In the United States growing professionalism

gave rise to the development of four
founding engineering societies:
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) (1851),
American Institute of Electrical Engineers (AIEE)
(1884),
American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)
(1880),
American Institute of Mining Engineers (AIME)
(1871).

ASCE and AIEE were more closely identified

with the engineer as learned professional
ASME and AIME (almost entirely), are of the
view that the engineer is a technical
employee.

Even so, at that time ethics was viewed as a

personal rather than a broad professional
concern.

When the 19th century drew to a close and the

20th century began, there had been series of
significant structural failures, including some
spectacular bridge failures, notably:
Ashtabula River Railroad Disaster (1876),
Tay Bridge Disaster (1879), and the
Quebec Bridge collapse (1907).

These had a profound effect on engineers and

forced the profession to confront shortcomings
in technical and construction practice, as well
as ethical standards.

One response was the development of

formal codes of ethics by three of the four
founding engineering societies.
AIEE adopted theirs in 1912.
ASCE and ASME did so in 1914.
AIME did not adopt a code of ethics in its
history

Over the following decades most American

states and Canadian provinces either
required engineers to be licensed, or passed
special legislation reserving title rights to
organization of professional engineers.

The Canadian require all engineers working in

engineering fields that posed a risk to life, health,
property, the public welfare and the environment
to be licensed. [More strict]
The US model only require those engineers
practicing independently (i.e. consulting
engineers) to be licensed, while engineers
working in industry, education, and sometimes
government need not be licensed. [Less strict]

This caused a split between professional

engineers and those in industry.
Professional societies have adopted generally
uniform codes of ethics.
Technical societies have generally not adopted
these, but offer ethics education and resources
to members similar to those of the professional
societies.
The question of who is to be held in the highest
regard: the public or the employer, is still an
open one in industry, and sometimes in
professional practice. ???

 In

engineering context, the industry consists

of:
Groups of working professionals supposedly acting
to achieve an engineering objective, to the mutual
benefit of their client and to the community at large.
High expectation in delivery and performance, with
justifiable remunerations of the professional
engineer.
Mentality of strong vs weak: Survival of the fittest.
Struggle to climb the ladder of success by
ambitious individuals.

The rationale for teaching ethics to

engineers and computer scientists seems
fairly obvious. Their work (developing,
designing and implementing technologies)
has an enormous impact on the world.
Johnson, Deborah G., (1993) Teaching Ethics in
Science and Engineering. Science and
Engineering Ethics 1: 83-87.

The general principals of the codes of ethics are largely

similar across the various engineering societies and
chartering authorities of the world
The following is an example from the American Society of
Civil Engineers:
Engineers shall hold paramount the safety, health and welfare of the
public and shall strive to comply with the principles of sustainable
development in the performance of their professional duties.
Engineers shall perform services only in areas of their competence.
Engineers shall issue public statements only in an objective and truthful
manner.
Engineers shall act in professional matters for each employer or client
as faithful agents or trustees, and shall avoid conflicts of interest.
Engineers shall build their professional reputation on the merit of their
services and shall not compete unfairly with others.

Continued from the American Society of

Civil Engineers:
Engineers shall act in such a manner as to
uphold and enhance the honor, integrity, and
dignity of the engineering profession and shall
act with zero-tolerance for bribery, fraud, and
corruption.
Engineers shall continue their professional
development throughout their careers, and shall
provide opportunities for the professional
development of those engineers under their
supervision.

Institute of Electrical and Electronics

Engineers:
"We, the members of the IEEE, do hereby
commit ourselves to the highest ethical and
professional conduct and agree: 1. to accept
responsibility in making decisions consistent with
the safety, health and welfare of the public, and
to disclose promptly factors that might endanger
the public or the environment;"

to accept responsibility in making decisions consistent with the safety, health, and
welfare of the public, and to disclose promptly factors that might endanger the public or
the environment;
to avoid real or perceived conflicts of interest whenever possible, and to disclose them to
affected parties when they do exist;
to be honest and realistic in stating claims or estimates based on available data;
to reject bribery in all its forms;
to improve the understanding of technology; its appropriate application, and potential
consequences;
to maintain and improve our technical competence and to undertake technological tasks
for others only if qualified by training or experience, or after full disclosure of pertinent
limitations;
to seek, accept, and offer honest criticism of technical work, to acknowledge and correct
errors, and to credit properly the contributions of others;
to treat fairly all persons regardless of such factors as race, religion, gender, disability,
age, or national origin;
to avoid injuring others, their property, reputation, or employment by false or malicious
action;
to assist colleagues and co-workers in their professional development and to support
them in following this code of ethics.

Institution of Civil Engineers:

"Members of the ICE should always be aware of
their overriding responsibility to the public good.
A members obligations to the client can never
override this, and members of the ICE should not
enter undertakings which compromise this
responsibility. The public good encompasses
care and respect for the environment, and for
humanitys cultural, historical and archaeological
heritage, as well as the primary responsibility
members have to protect the health and well
being of present and future generations."

American Society of Mechanical

Engineers: "Engineers shall hold
paramount the safety, health and welfare of
the public in the performance of their
professional duties."

Responsibility of members in safeguarding

public interest and exercise of professional
skill
A member should act with fairness and
integrity towards all persons with whom his
work is connected
Rules which governs conduct of members in
any advisory or consultative capacity are laid
downaimed to prevent conflict of interest
through ill-advised financial transactions

Under Engineers Act 1967, the Board may

cancel registration of any engineer, if: He is guilty of fraud, dishonesty or moral
turpitude;
He accepts illicit commission;
He fails to disclose to his client any vested
financial interest in his dealings with the client.

Members should uphold high principles and

establish themselves as an elite group of
professional engineers who can be trusted
to give independent and unbiased
professional advice which in completely
unfettered by the possibility of conflicts of
interest arising

It was fear that professional responsibility

may have been underemphasized in the
practice of engineering.
Topics such as the following requires ethics
in engineers:

Safety and Welfare of the Public and of Clients

Professional Ethics
Legal Liabilities of Engineers
Environmental Responsibilities
Quality
Communications

Conflict of professional interest frequently

arises in the working environment of an
engineer. Discuss the statement and
propose the appropriate solutions for
overcoming the problem.

As an engineer responsible for the development of a

new project, your first task according to the planning
schedule is to clear the land and prepare the site for
construction. To do so, you will need to clear vast
stretches of land that will undoubtedly cause land
erosion and subsequently contaminating the streams
and rivers around the site. You are under
tremendous pressure to finish the task as the job is
already behind schedule. Given the constraints that
you have with regards to deadline, limited technical
solutions and the need to preserve the environment,
discuss the ethical considerations which confront
you under these circumstances.

The next slide shows the carbon cycle,

which in excessive surplus will be the cause
of global warming.
Hence, the need to minimize or to reduce
the carbon output from human occupation
on earth.

The trend now is moving towards design

and built green buildings with energy
saving and sustainable development in
mind.

Engineers should study engineering ethics

from the perspective of a moral agent as
opposed to a moral judge. We fully
subscribe to this approach not only for
teaching engineering ethics, but also for
teaching (and practicing) in other areas of
professional responsibility.
Whitbeck, Caroline. (1995) Teaching Ethics to
Scientists and Engineers: Moral Agents and
Moral Problems. Science and Engineering Ethics
1: 299-308.

For engineers, engineering ethics is not a

topic separate from engineering, it is part of
the essence of engineering as it pertains to
the professional responsibilities that the
engineer has with society.
Whitbeck, Caroline. (1995) Teaching Ethics to
Scientists and Engineers: Moral Agents and
Moral Problems. Science and Engineering Ethics
1: 299-308.

Accepted ways of performance

at the work place
Winning by not sabotaging
others
Avoiding conflicts of interest
Not to misrepresent oneself in
front of others
Always maintain integrity and
honesty in work practices having strong morals
BE A PROFESSIONAL always
act in the best interest of the
client without fear or favour.

Governs by Engineers Act 1967 (revised in

1972, 1973,1974,1987, 2002 and 2007)
All Engineers MUST register with the Board
of Engineers, Malaysia upon graduation
It is an offence under the Engineers Act if
engineers practice without registering with
BEM

Regulates all
engineering practices
in Malaysia
e.g. register all
practicing graduate and
professional engineers,
set scale of fees
charged by engineers,
etc.

Issues of ethics asked during Professional

Interviews at IEM:
Conflicting roles played by engineers employed
by consulting engineers and contractors
To finish the job on time at minimum cost, or to
ensure highest quality piece of work at premium
cost
Balancing clients requirement to safety of
users/community at large
Separate personal problems from work-related
issues

Responsibility of engineers:
The engineer recognizes that the greatest merit is
the work, so exercise their profession committed
to serving society, attending to the welfare and
progress of the majority.

The work of engineers involved

transforming the natural surrounding, in
order to construct built environment for
human habitat.
By transforming nature for the benefit of
mankind, the engineer must increase their
own awareness of the world,

i.e. the abode of man and his interest in the

universe is a guarantee of overcoming their spirit
and knowledge of reality to make it fairer and
happier.

The engineer should reject papers /

proposals that are intended to harm the
general interest, in this way avoid situations
involving hazards or constitute a threat to
the environment, life, health and other
rights of human beings (and nowadays even
wild life).

A basic ethical dilemma is that an engineer has

the duty to report to the appropriate authority a
possible risk to others from a client or employer
failing to follow the engineer's directions.
According to first principles, this duty overrides
the duty to a client and/or employer.
An engineer may be disciplined, or have their
license revoked, even if the failure to report such
a danger does not result in the loss of life or
health.

In many cases, this duty can be discharged

by advising the client of the consequences
in a forthright matter, and ensuring the
client takes the engineer's advice.
However, the engineer must ensure that the
remedial steps are taken and, if they are
not, the situation must be reported to the
appropriate authority.

In very rare cases, where even a governmental

authority may not take appropriate action, the
engineer can only discharge the duty by making
the situation public.
As a result, whistleblowing by professional
engineers is not an unusual event, and courts
have often sided with engineers in such cases,
overruling duties to employers and
confidentiality considerations that otherwise
would have prevented the engineer from
speaking out.

On 3 January 2013, The Star published a press

statement from IEM on the 60m high shotcrete
wall collapse in Bukit Setiawangsa KL, which
happened on 28 December 2012, excerpt as
follows:
IEM is concerned about reports in The Star regarding
the slope failure at Bukit Setiawangsa, referred to
Shotcrete caused collapse.
The title is misleading as it prematurely states that the
said failure was due to shotcrete even before a proper
conclusion was made based on investigations, facts and
substantiated evidence.

In the same press statement in The Star:

Engineering design is the role of the professional
engineer registered with the Board of Engineers
Malaysia under the Registration of Engineers Act.
Geologists should refrain from giving engineering
solutions or professional advice related to designs
involving public safety.
He made this statement: Shotcrete walls should only
be applied for granite slopes which are solid.
This is a contradictory statement. If the granite is
solid, there would be no need to have shotcrete to
protect the granite surface from surface erosion.

IEM is a non-profit, non-governmental

organization (NGO) cater to professional
engineers as a learned society, disseminating
scientific/engineering knowledge or
updates/technology for benefit of members
in their work/professional practices.
Whereas BEM is a government regulatory
body serving to register all practicing
engineers (non-PE and PE) in Malaysia, and
to monitor professional conduct / practices in
accordance to Engineers Act 1967.

IEM conduct PE examinations, and BEM confer PE

recognitions.
IEM serve its membership (currently at 25,000+)
while BEM register ALL practicing engineers.
In cases of malpractices or misconduct, IEM only
offer advice and guidance to its members
involved, and report to BEM for actions (where
necessary) for disciplinary measures.
BEM has the right to revoke professional license
for practice, while IEM can only suspend or cancel
membership of errant member involved.

Besides dealing with technical practices,

engineers do face many broader
considerations of business conduct. These
include:
Relationships with clients, consultants, competitors, and
contractors.
Ensuring legal compliance by clients, client's contractors,
and others.
Conflict of interest.
Bribery and kickbacks.
Treatment of confidential or proprietary information.
Consideration of the employers assets.
Outside employment/activities.

There have been many cases of engineering

accidents / mishaps involving injury and
loss of lives and also to properties in the
past and recently.
These are tied to professional code of
conduct and to an extent to code of ethics,
in which investigation will be undertaken by
authority to seek answers to questions from
such incidents, esp, What? Why? Who?
When? How?

Environmental ethics is the part of

environmental philosophy which considers
extending the traditional boundaries of
ethics from solely including humans to
including the non-human world. It exerts
influence on a large range of disciplines
including environmental law, environmental
sociology, ecotheology, ecological
economics, ecology and environmental
geography.

Should we continue to clear cut forests for the sake of

human consumption?
Why should we continue to propagate our species, and life
itself?
Should we continue to make gasoline powered vehicles
What environmental obligations do we need to keep for
future generations?
Is it right for humans to knowingly cause the extinction of a
species for the convenience of humanity?
How should we best use and conserve the space
environment to secure and expand life?

The above are tough questions, which

politicians and business groups have
made a mess of in general.

In paper entitled, Environmental ethics:

An Introduction, Univ of California, USA.
"Moral responsibility" normally implies
knowledge, capacity, choice, and value
significance. That is to say, if a person is
morally responsible to do something, then
he

(a) knows of this requirement,

(b) is capable of performing it,
(c) can freely choose whether or not to do it, and
(d) the performance thereof affects the welfare
and/or liberty of other beings.

Until recently our effects upon the

natural environment were regarded as
morally neutral since nature, we
assumed, was both impersonal and too
vast to be injured by our interventions,
or else, at the very least, we were quite
unable to foresee the harm resulting
from our dealings with nature.
Now, we know better, after witnessing
the nature destructions by human
actions or inactions.

Why care about nature "for itself" when

only people "matter"? If you deny that
"only people matter," on what grounds
can you defend that denial? (After all, if
no people are around to regret it, what
difference does it make if a species, a
canyon, or even a planet is destroyed?
If people who are around prefer to
destroy natural objects and landscapes,
then so what? Why not?
Discuss

When species or landscapes or wilderness areas

are destroyed, what, of value, is lost to mankind?
Will future generations "miss" what we have
"taken from them"?
How could they if they never will know what they have
"lost"?

"Should Trees Have [Legal] Standing?" as posed

by Christopher Stone contends).
On what grounds, if not for mankind's sake?

Does "land ownership" make moral sense, or is it

a morally absurd and repugnant concept in
Western culture?
As the native Americans would claim?.

2010, 3rd Edition

Oxford University
Press.
This enduring work
continues to serve as the
definitive statement as to
why trees, oceans, animals,
and the environment as a
whole should be bestowed
with legal rights, so that the
voiceless elements in
nature are protected for
future generations.

Do human beings have a need for nature that

implies an obligation to preserve it? What is the
evidence for this?
What are the ultimate grounds of an affirmation
to protect the environment? Are they rational?
Irrational? Non- rational? Mystical?
What, basically, is wrong with the developer's
anthropocentric and utilitarian land ethic? Why
not treat land as a "commodity" rather than a
"community"?
If five-hundred backpackers and river runners per
year enjoyed Glen Canyon before 1962, and fifty
thousand power boaters and water skiers enjoy it
now, then why not have a Lake Powell there?

Do future generations (who, after all, do not

exist now) have a "right" now to a clean and
natural environment when their time
comes?
Can man "improve" upon nature? How?
What constitutes "improvement"?
Do the facts of environmental science have
moral implications?
Are human beings psychologically capable
of caring for nature and for future
generations? If they have this capacity, are
we morally obligated to nurture it?

Differentiate
between
Descriptive ethics
Normative (or
prescriptive)
ethics
Metaethics

Computer Ethics is a branch of practical

philosophy which deals with how computing
professionals should make decisions
regarding professional and social conduct.

Margaret Anne Pierce, a professor in the

Department of Mathematics and Computers
at Georgia Southern University has
categorized the ethical decisions related to
computer technology and usage into 3
primary influences:
1. The individual's own personal code.
2. Any informal code of ethical conduct that exists
in the work place.
3. Exposure to formal codes of ethics.

In this era, computer security is a topic of concern

in the field of Computer Ethics. The problem is not
so much the physical security but rather logical
security, which Spafford, Heaphy and Ferbrache
[Spafford, et al, 1989] divide into five aspects:
1. Privacy and confidentiality
2. Integrity assuring that data and programs
are not modified without proper authority
3. Unimpaired service
4. Consistency ensuring that the data and
behavior we see today will be the same
tomorrow
5. Controlling access to resources

Malicious programmed threats, provide a

significant challenge to computer security
e.g. viruses, which cannot run on their own, but
rather are inserted into other computer programs

Computer crimes, such as embezzlement or

planting of logic bombs, are normally
committed by trusted personnel who have
permission to use the computer system.
Hackers intentionally steal data or commit
vandalism, while others merely explore
the system.

One of the more controversial areas of

computer ethics concerns the intellectual
property rights connected with software
ownership.
Two schools of thoughts:

Stallman, 1993 advocates free and open rights

Johnson, 1992 for protected rights for individuals
or organisations concerned

Some people, like Richard Stallman who

started the Free Software Foundation,
believe that software ownership should not
be allowed at all. He claims that all
information should be free, and all
programs should be available for copying,
studying and modifying by anyone who
wishes to do so [Stallman, 1993].

Others argue that software companies or

programmers would not invest weeks and
months of work and significant funds in the
development of software if they could not
get the investment back in the form of
license fees or sales [Johnson, 1992].

Many people think that software should be

ownable, but casual copying of personally
owned programs for one's friends should also be
permitted (see [Nissenbaum, 1995]).
The software industry claims that millions of
dollars in sales are lost because of such copying.
Ownership is a complex matter, since there are
several different aspects of software that can be
owned and three different types of ownership:
copyrights, trade secrets, and patents.

Computer professionals have specialized

knowledge and often have positions with
authority and respect in the community,
esp. in a globalized cybernetwork world.
For this reason, they are able to have a
significant impact upon the world, including
many of the things that people value.
Along with such power to change the world
comes the duty to exercise that power
responsibly [Gotterbarn, 2001].

Computer professionals find themselves in a

variety of professional relationships with other
people [Johnson, 1994], including:

employer employee
client professional
professional professional
society professional

In USA, Association for Computing Machinery

(ACM) and the Institute of Electrical and
Electronic Engineers (IEEE), have established
codes of ethics, curriculum guidelines and
accreditation requirements, as guidances.

The ethics in work practices are applicable

and can be extended to individual students,
particularly those in engineering studies.
This depends very much on personal
character, perhaps built up and learnt from
parental guidance and peer group pressure.
Whatever it is and origin, the work ethics in
a person has to be nurtured and built on,
esp in the outside world of rapid changing
technologies and evolving work practices.

Adherence to study programme and

requirements, i.e. class attendances,
submission of completed work on time, spend
time outside of classroom on preparation and
revision,etc.
No plagiarism, no cheating in assignments,
class tests and examinations.
Participate and contribute effectively in group
study, projects, assignments, outings, etc.
Personal time management: no last minute
work, has to plan out work in advance.

Lawrence Kohlberg, a developmental

psychologist who studied the constructivist
theory of Jean Piaget, developed his own
series of cognitive development that
extended beyond the earlier constructivist
theory.
He postulated his theory while he did his
postgraduate studies in 1958.

The theory holds that moral reasoning, the

basis for ethical behavior, has six
identifiable developmental stages, each
more adequate at responding to moral
dilemmas than its predecessor.
Kohlberg's six stages can be more generally
grouped into three levels of two stages
each:

1. Pre-conventional
2. Conventional
3. Post-conventional

1. Obedience and
punishment
orientation (How can I
avoid punishment?)

3. Interpersonal accord
and conformity (Social
norms) (The good
boy/good girl attitude)

2. Self-interest
orientation (What's in
it for me?) (Paying for
a benefit)

4. Authority and
social-order
maintaining
orientation (Law and
order morality)

Level 1 (PreConventional)

Level 2 (Conventional)

5. Social contract
orientation

6. Universal ethical
principles (Principled
conscience)

Level 3 (PostConventional)

Kohlberg suggested
that there may be a
seventh stage
Transcendental
Morality, or Morality of
Cosmic Orientation
which linked religion
with moral reasoning

Speculative 7th Stage

One criticism of Kohlberg's theory is that it

emphasizes justice to the exclusion of other
values, and so may not adequately address
the arguments of those who value other
moral aspects of actions.
Carol Gilligan has argued that Kohlberg's
theory is overly androcentric*.

Kohlberg's theory was initially developed based

on empirical research using only male
participants; Gilligan argued that it did not
adequately describe the concerns of women.
* Dominated by or emphasizing masculine
interests or a masculine point of view

Gilligan's 1982 book, "In A Different Voice:

Psychological Theory & Women's Development,"
takes its basis in the moral development of women.
Kohlberg's earlier research did not include women
in its study, but included interviews with males.
Carol Gilligan developed her theory of moral
development in response to Lawrence Kohlberg's
1969 examination of moral concepts including
those related to justice, rights, equality and human
welfare.

Gilligan theorized that women feel inequality and

fairness as less of an issue than do men because
they do not break away from a close association
with the mother as early as do boys, who assert
their masculinity by asserting independence.
Carol Gilligan was a student of Kohlberg, who
contrasted his additions and provided her own
justification for the later developments in human
cognitive development, which considered gender
identity.

Level One
The moral development of women is, according to
Gilligan, split into three levels. The first level is the
perception of survival of the self, this level is described as
the individual moving from selfish to responsible.

Level Two
The second level associates self-sacrifice with goodnessthe individual finds a place within the given structure of
society.

Level Three
In the final level of moral development, the woman finds
truth in the understanding of herself and a realization of
the consequences of her actions.

Identify the differences in moral

development of human in the theories
postulated by Kohlberg and Gilligan.
This is to be kept as personal work for
student own reference.

The Washington Accord is an international

accreditation agreement for professional
engineering academic degrees, between the
bodies responsible for accreditation in its
signatory countries.
Established in 1989, the signatories as of
2010 are Australia, Canada, Chinese Taipei,
Hong Kong China, Ireland, Japan, Korea,
Malaysia, New Zealand, Singapore, South
Africa, Turkey, the United Kingdom, and the
United States.

The agreement recognizes that there is

substantial equivalency of programs accredited
by those signatories.
Graduates of accredited programs in any of the
signatory countries are recognized by the
other signatory countries as having met the
academic requirements for entry to the
practice of engineering.
Recognition of accredited programs is not
retroactive but takes effect only from the date
of admission of the country to signatory status.

Australia - (Engineers Australia, 1989)

Canada - (Engineers Canada, 1989)
Chinese Taipei - (Institute of Engineering Education Taiwan, 2007)
Hong Kong China - (The Hong Kong Institution of Engineers, 1995)
Ireland - (Engineers Ireland, 1989)
Japan - (Japan Accreditation Board for Engineering Education, 2005)
Korea - (Accreditation Board for Engineering Education of Korea, 2007)
Malaysia - (Board of Engineers Malaysia, 2009)
New Zealand - (Institution of Professional Engineers New Zealand, 1989)
Singapore - (Institution of Engineers Singapore, 2006)
South Africa - (Engineering Council of South Africa, 1999)
Turkey - (MUDEK, 2011)
Russia - (Russian Association for Engineering Education, 2012)
United Kingdom - (Engineering Council UK, 1989)
United States - (ABET, 1989)

Bangladesh - (Board of Accreditation for

Engineering and Technical Education)
Germany - (German Accreditation Agency for
Study Programs in Engineering and
Informatics)
India - (National Board of Accreditation of All
India Council for Technical Education)
Pakistan - (Pakistan Engineering Council)
Sri Lanka - (Institution of Engineers, Sri
Lanka)

The Washington Accord covers undergraduate

engineering degrees; Engineering technology and
postgraduate programs are not covered by the
accord.
Only qualifications awarded after the signatory
country or region became part of the Washington
Accord are recognized.
The accord is not directly responsible for the
licensing or registration of Professional Engineers
and Chartered Engineers, but it does cover the
academic requirements that are part of the
licensing processes in signatory countries

Cross-recognition and acceptance of

engineering degrees and graduates
between countries which are WA
signatories.
All engineering programmes accredited by
Malaysias Engineering Accreditation
Council (EAC) are recognised by engineering
bodies of all other WA signatory countries,
e.g. USA, UK, Australia, Canada, NZ, Japan,
HK, Singapore, etc

Nextoccupational safety and health issues

in engineering practices