Poll

| More

July 17 - July 21, 2017

A Connecticut man was recently convicted of faking a bridge inspection, leading to the reinspection of dozens of bridges in the region. In cases like this, should an inspector’s employer also be held responsible?


Yes. The firm employing the inspector is also culpable, because any work he or she has done under their employment is ultimately their responsibility.
No. If it can’t be proven that the employer knew what was going on, the individual who broke the law is the one who should pay the price.
Other (please explain in the comments section).

Voting for this poll closed on Friday, July 21, 2017



Tagged categories: Criminal acts; Ethics; Fraud; Inspection; Program/Project Management; Quality control
   

View Results | Suggest a topic


Previous Polls from the Past Month

July 10 - July 14, 2017
Government

July 10 - July 14, 2017
Titanium Dioxide

July 13, 2017
Government


More previous polls
Advertisements
 
DeFelsko Corporation

 
Fischer Technology Inc.

 
KTA-Tator, Inc. - Corporate Office

 
ABKaelin, LLC

 
Mitsubishi Gas Chemical America

 
Safety Lamp of Houston, Inc.

 
Norton Sandblasting Equipment

 
SAFE Systems, Inc.

 
Sidewinder/Persyst Enterprises, Inc.

 
 
 

Technology Publishing Co., 1501 Reedsdale Street, Suite 2008, Pittsburgh, PA 15233

TEL 1-412-431-8300  • FAX  1-412-431-5428  •  EMAIL webmaster@paintsquare.com


The Technology Publishing Network

PaintSquare the Journal of Protective Coatings & Linings Paint BidTracker

 
EXPLORE:      JPCL   |   PaintSquare News   |   Interact   |   Buying Guides   |   Webinars   |   Resources   |   Classifieds
REGISTER AND SUBSCRIBE:      Free PaintSquare Registration   |   Subscribe to JPCL   |   Subscribe to PaintSquare News
MORE:      About PaintSquare.com   |   Privacy Policy   |   Terms & Conditions   |   Support   |   Site Map   |   Search   |   Contact Us