When Evan Vokes, a qualified engineer, started working for TransCanada in 2007, he realized that there were some problems in the work ethic of his employer and quickly discovered himself in a moral struggle. TransCanada is one of the largest companies focusing on oil and gas infrastructure in North America. There are federal regulations on welding procedures and pipeline testing. Vokes found that there were no records of welding procedures and that no tests had been documented. After doing some research, he discovered that the welds did not comply with federal regulations. This not only means that TransCanada ignored the law, but also ignored the risk of rupture and potential explosion of pipelines. A possible result of this could have been a lot of physical damage but also endangered the environment and many human lives. Engineers are trained not to harm the public but rather to promote public welfare. This struggle will be discussed in the following paragraphs. Did Vokes make the right choice by becoming an informant? We will take a look from a Kantian and rule utilitarian perspective. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay Kant's moral theory is based on four main parts: will, duty, maxim, and categorical imperative. These four guide in deciding whether an act is morally right or not. As a main idea his view is that any act is morally right if it is done with good intentions in mind. The duty must be defined in order to conclude the Will. The will helps to find the correct decision, the duty should be universal while the maxim is a subjective principle that dictates how one should behave, for example here the engineering law could be the maxim. The categorical imperative is a tool you can use to test whether a personal moral principle or maxim is right. Will or intentions are good if they can be universalized, it does not place anyone as a means to an end, meaning that a person would only be used as a tool and that each person's autonomy remains intact. Finally, the conditions of any situation do not matter to Kant; as long as the previously mentioned four parts are satisfied and autonomy is maintained, the means to an end are not applicable, and duty is universal, any act is morally right. The duty in the case of Evan Vokes can be defined as follows: I see a problem, namely the non-conformity of the welding procedures and my will is to tell myself that it is my duty to prevent this from happening. Therefore, I must make it public and report the problems to the relevant authorities. We can immediately say that according to Kant this solution is wrong because the universality of duty is not satisfied. Supervisors and even the CEO repeatedly gave instructions and suggestions to Mr. Vokes to stop investigating and follow their orders. He confirmed this in an interview given in 2017: "More than once my manager told me he was disappointed in my performance because I wasn't doing what I was told." Were they telling you to ignore your conscience? “They told me to ignore the engineering law.” This quote shows that he was told directly that they were not happy with him, but he is referring to the Engineering Act and that it is his duty to comply with it. Furthermore, the autonomy of colleagues and superiors is at risk as the publicized information could result in the loss of one's job. There.