GS4 · 20 marks · 250 words

In a tragic incident that profoundly impacted the community, a public transport bus operated by the city's transportation department plummeted into a ravine due to brake failure. This catastrophic event resulted in the fatalities of several passengers and the driver. As the Head of Safety, the responsibility to investigate and address the underlying causes of this accident is incumbent upon you. The accident occurred on a steep mountainous route, a critical and challenging area for bus operations. Initial investigations revealed two primary causes: 1. The driver was found to be under the influence of alcohol. 2. The maintenance team had not adequately serviced the bus's braking system. These findings highlighted severe lapses in both the human and mechanical aspects of the transport system. Upon concluding the inquiry, you realized the complexity of the situation. There were numerous uncertainties and ambiguities, preventing a straightforward assignment of responsibility or a definitive conclusion. The accident might have been averted if the maintenance team had performed their duties diligently. Similarly, if the bus driver had not been intoxicated, he might have been able to prevent the bus from falling into the ravine. As the Head of Safety, the conclusions of your report carry significant consequences. Firstly, if the driver is deemed culpable due to his intoxication, his family may lose a substantial amount of post-death benefits because he was under the influence while on duty. Secondly, if you conceal the driver's intoxication and attribute the incident solely to poor maintenance, the maintenance crew would face job termination. This situation required extensive introspection before finalizing the report. (a) Identify the ethical issues and dilemmas in the above case. (b) What are the options available to you in the above case? (c) What do you think is more ethical to focus on the personal responsibility of the driver, who was intoxicated, or on the broader systemic issue of maintenance failures? Justify your answer with relevant ethical theories.

Answered by 5 toppers · CSE 2024–2025

Syllabus: Case Studies on above issues.

How toppers approached it

From 4 of the 5 answers · about 340 words · 50% drew a diagram.

Opening

Body

Rahul ShekharAIR 46 · CSE 2024 · 351 wordsTheir whole copy

Opening

The case pertains to a fatal bus accident involving maintenance lapses as well as driver's dereliction of duty.

Body · points and prose

Issues and dilemmas:-

Stakeholder	Issues / Dilemmas
1) I, Head of Safety	1) Ensuring justice to victims

Impartiality
Foresightedness to be displayed.
Care for driver's family v/s objectivity | | 2) Victims of the accident and their families | 1) Justice
Personal Loss
Anger and distrust against system |


3) Bus driver's family	1) Livelihood loss

Helplessness | | 4) Maintenance team | 1) Irresponsible attitude
Accountability v/s threat to career. | | 5) Society at large | 1) Social contract v/s government inefficiency |

(b) Options available

Hold driver as the sole guilty. This will ensure peaceful process in office and among people but will not serve long term interests.
Hold maintenance team accountable. It serves as a detriment to their careers and livelihood but may ensure long term changes for safety.
Present the facts as it is, i.e. both are at fault. Due punishment to the maintenance team and compensation to driver's family on humanitarian grounds would be recommended. Along with it due quality baselines, procedures and assurances to be put into place.

(c) In my understanding, both the aspects need due focus but resolving systemic issues will require more diligence as it needs attitudinal change.

Broader system issue needs more focus-

Social contract theory demands public servants to work in the spirit of social benefits.
Public interest and deontology is being violated.
The lackadaisical attitude displayed by maintenance team points towards lack of authentic living as per Kierkegaard.

Personal responsibility deserves due focus as well.

Being drunk while on duty points towards lack of virtues as under Aristotle's virtue ethics.
Against It is an akusala kamma as per Buddhist ethics.
It goes against the principles of care ethics.

Close · a summary

All stakeholders in public service must abide to deontology as well as display strong character to serve public interest.

Ethical concerns and dilemmas arising in government and private institutions, and how a conflict between two duties is resolved.