||      print this page

Take The Professional Ethics Challenge for October!

Ethics Case No. 1 – Bribes, Considerations and Fees

Anonymous Author

Statement of the Situation

An oil company with concessions in an African country has exploration drill equipment, camp facilities and supplies sitting in the government customs yard. The senior customs official is indirectly suggesting that a “consideration” in cash be made to ensure the equipment is released in a timely manner. There are no customs documents, which suggest that such a fee is officially sanctioned by the government. Equipment has been sitting in the port facility for 6 weeks and the project is falling behind schedule. The approaching rainy season will make roads impassable and precious time is being lost in the drill season. The costs of delaying the project far exceed the cost of the “consideration” as driller crews and field personnel have arrived and are all in hotels awaiting mobilization. These types of “considerations” are encountered throughout the country at all levels of government, at police road checks, for drilling permits, for water permits, for the use of surface rights, at local health clinics, etc. The people in this country are desperately poor and it is a ‘cultural norm’ for them to share their earnings with their entire tribe.

Question

Which of the following ethical routes should the professional geoscientist follow?

A. Refuse to pay as per company ethical guidelines and notify various government ministers to apply pressure. Action sends a message to officials that bribes will not be tolerated now or in future.

B. Pay the fee and stop wasting shareholders money. Assume the fee is just part of doing business and is the cultural/ethical norm in that country.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What happened? Actual outcome will appear in Field Notes-November, 2005 issue.

Wanted: Ethical cases regarding incomplete disclosure, problems with conflicting test data results, insufficient information with which to draw stated conclusions, pressure to rewrite conclusions or any others that you can think of that affect geoscientists. Authors will remain anonymous. Articles to be published in future issues of Field Notes.

For more information on APGO, please contact info@apgo.net

Delivery Notice: This newsletter is issued 10 times per year to all APGO members. Non-members may also subscribe and receive the newsletter with access to non-member-only content. For more information, please see www.apgo.net.

Field Notes is published by APGO and is edited by Wendy Diaz, P.Geo. If you have comments or wish to contribute material to this newsletter, please contact Wendy Diaz, P.Geo., Crystal Spekking, Northern Ontario Communications Officer or Oliver Bonham, P.Geo., Executive Director/Registar.

Copyright 2004, Association of Professional Geoscientists of Ontario (APGO)