At an internal meeting of the supervisors, managers, director, and C.E.O. I filled the role of Welding Technician.

Among our conversation, I explained the poor weld profiles were due to the constraints of a WPS not fully developed for flexibility by the PQR.

I was pressured to go outside of these written parameters, "So long as the heat value stays below X"

When asked to the Plant Manager & C.W.I. where in code or contract documents this was allowed, the response was roughly, 'Our last Weld Engineer had this come up in an audit, and I don't remember what he said, but what he said was enough to smooth over the external auditor. You can go outside of amps, volts, and travel limits if you're under the heat."

With code book in hand, I showed that this was not an acceptable change.

Knowing this, we moved to create new WPS's with supporting PQR's that would allow greater flexibility in the WPS rangers permitted.

When listening to the Director of Quality Control they outlined how the test would be done, specifically:
"We had [past/potential] customer come through and their C.W.I. slapped us on the write for being out of position. So we need to get that paper changed, and when we do these tests, we'll do like we always have, weld it, flip it over, weld it again and write down what we actually weld on the WPS."

At this comment I informed the table that if this company wished to continue I would have to resign from my position.

The C.E.O. Asked for the validity of that statement, of which the Director of Quality informed the table that, 'Yes, it is illegal."

Another Manager at this table, on my behalf, made the comment of "[Myself] has a code of ethics."

This conversation was left with a plan on how to test the materials, and despite my requisite that the test plates need only be 25" long by 14" wide, the Plant Manager and C.W.I. ordered plate to be cut 2' x 10' (making a 10' x 4' plate of steel for one PQR).

To the best of my knowledge, this company never has tested in the position of over head, despite their production being made in the over head position. Contract documents that the PQR's are to be tested as performed/will be performed in production. D1.1:2015 illustrates the significant of position and testing. This company has signed all previous WPS by Welding Engineers and C.W.I.'s before myself as, 'Adheres to the standards and regulations set forth by A.W.D. D1.1 Structural Steel Code (2010).'

With this, the very next day I submitted my letter of resignation and walked out within an hour of doing so. No two weeks, no bargaining. I had great confidence that the urgency that these tests were wanted to be implemented I would be pressured greatly into falsifying the PQR, instead of approaching that event, I resigned, 'Owing to ethical considerations and a fundamental cultural difference...'

A week later I was informed by the individual that had stated the line of 'Myself has a code of ethics." they were forced to resign after refusing to perform the tests as I had declined in the meeting. This individual has since contacted the main customer of this company who is launching an investigation, as well this individual has contacted the National Labor Relations Board of which have agreed that there is a case here.

My question is now, do I have a duty, as a C.W.I. to inform the A.W.S. of these events, and/or should I contact the A.W.S. for direction on this issue.

To say the least, I am terrified of loosing my C.W.I. certificate, I've worked terribly hard on this sticking to the book and I fear that this is going to blow up in my face.

Thank you for your assistance on this difficult issue. If you have any numbers I should call, please feel free to include them.

I believe you would have to file charges against the CWI involved before AWS could do anything. AWS cannot go after the employer because the employer is not the party that is certified by AWS.

Al