When the Chief Asks You to Lie

5.5 When the Chief Asks You to Lie

Controversies: 3.12, 4.10, 6.19 Key Words: truth, abuse of power, city, loyalty, family, annual evaluation Case Complexity → Moderate CD: 7.13 Public Service Ethics and Professionalism

You are the captain of one of the city’s fire stations. The fire station is in seri- ous need of repairs as a critical portion of the station has settled, causing it to become unusable. A tropical storm has blown across the city, causing heavy damage and flooding. The area in and around the city has been declared a disas- ter area and both state and federal disaster officials are assessing damage for emergency relief. The fire chief has advised federal and state officials that the damage to the station was caused by the storm. Prior to relief officials arriving to assess the damage at the station, the fire chief calls you to advise you of their impending arrival and tells you to inform the relief officials that the damage is

a result of the storm. Although this is not stated, annual evaluations are due next month and the chief is known to use the evaluations to reward loyalty and punish those who do not follow his wishes. Due to a previous illness in the family, you are very depen- dent on his annual evaluation to keep your salary up with inflation.

Building Organizations of Integrity ◾ 147

Discussion Questions

1. Should you lie for the chief?

2. Should you complain to the chief that you are being put in a position that you cannot agree with?

3. Should you pass the lie on to another staff member by asking him or her to deceive the assessment team?

Case Assessment

Chris Bosch, Fire Chief, Tracy, California:

I believe that you should stand behind the truth regardless of the fire chief’s request or the potential outcome. To mislead the federal disaster officials would be a complete breach of ethics and could cause you to lose the respect of your staff and could cost you and the chief your jobs. Chances are, if your chief was at all credible, he would never have placed

any of his staff members in this position. You should attempt to discuss this issue with the chief, clearly

state your position on the issue and make it clear that you will not mis- lead the federal officials. You should document your discussion with the chief as well as the outcome and maintain a copy of that information for your files. Chances are, you have not heard the end of this issue. If the chief causes you to miss your annual merit increase as a result of your position on this issue, you would be justified to seek counsel and take this matter up through the courts.

Randy Deicke, Deputy Fire Chief, Batavia, Illinois:

First off, any officer with integrity would not lie or ask someone else to lie. That would never be in the best interest of the department or the individual. But, the question is what steps should be taken and the rationale behind them.

First, you have to take a close look at all the facts. This often involves physically listing them so they can be evaluated. The facts are:

◾ A portion of the fire station has become unstable. ◾ Th e chief claims the damage is due to the recent storm. ◾ He wants you to inform federal officials that the damage was caused by the storm. ◾ Your evaluation is due next month. ◾ You believe the chief evaluates based on loyalty.

148 ◾ Ethics Moments in Government: Cases and Controversies

◾ You need a good evaluation because monetary issues have put a great strain on you and your family.

Th e assumption is that you do not believe that the damage to the fi re station was caused by the storm. Therefore, you feel that the chief is asking you to lie for him.

I would let the chief know that I feel that the damage was not caused by the storm, but rather by the settling of the building. Then,

I would suggest a city engineer come out and give their impression of what caused the damage. A good chief would agree to a professional opinion and stick by it either way. That should be the end of the story.

But, what if the chief says no to an engineer and you feel strongly that you would be lying if you told the federal officials the damage was caused by the storm?

At that point, I would let the chief know my feelings and recom- mend that he have someone else talk to the federal officials. I would also explain that if I should find definitively that the damage was not caused by the storm, it would be my obligation to let the appropriate authorities know. It would probably not go well on my evaluation, and

I may not get that cost of living increase. My family and I would have to survive, but I should not let my personal life get so dependent on my job that it could compromise my integrity.

Th e solution was somewhat easy because firefighters are usually well protected from being fired for arbitrary or deceitful decisions. In this case, the most I was at risk of losing was a cost of living increase or perhaps a future promotion. None of those would mean the end of the world. But, without that protection or if this was the private sector, the situation could have a much larger consequence. If I was in jeopardy of losing my job and maybe eventually my home or family, the decision is no longer as easy to make. But, that is for another case study.