Discount Tutor
Virtue Ethics is a moral philosophy and approach, characterized by the pursuit of moral ideals, such as integrity, compassion, and justice. In particular, through the employment of this ethical code, the morality of an action is based off the disposition and character it displays and promotes (Arete), in addition, to the particular act’s underlying intention (Phronesis). Furthermore, through this approach, an action’s underlying value is measured based off of the virtues it advocates, and thus, the happiness that stems from the act, as a result (class notes). In order to properly employ “Virtue Ethics”, Stan Stark, head of Human Resources in Anzen, has a duty and an obligation to buy off the employment contracts of Tommy and Victor, as a means to dispose of these two employees. Only through these means would the integrity of Motorola be preserved, and thus, would Virtue Ethics be properly employed.
The first tenet of Virtue Ethics is Arete or character. Arete is characterized by one’s mannerisms, habits, and disposition. Furthermore, this tenet is distinguished by its proposed relationship with excellence and justice. Only one with strong moral character is capable of properly applying the first principle of Virtue Ethics, and thus, acting ethically (according to this theory) (class notes) . Tommy failed to employ integrity and strong moral character into his employment at Motorola. Furthermore, Tommy was completely and utterly disrespectful to his fellow employees and superiors. On multiple occasions, Tommy was told by Victor, his superior, that he was required to where his safety goggles. On several different occasions, Tommy failed to comply with this request and knowingly continued to break company policies, while working on the “Final Test Assembly” operation. Not only did Tommy put his own safety at risk, his actions completely undermined the authority of his boss, Victor, in addition, to the integrity of his fellow team members. How so? By failing to cooperate, Tommy consistently impaired both the functioning of his test group and the social harmony that was present (Price 433-36)
In addition, Nambu, the country of operation in this particular case, was synonymous with putting emphasis on social agreement or concord, in addition, to obligation and duty. As an employee and Nambunese citizen, Tommy was disobedient (essentially unmanageable), uncooperative, and failed to fulfill his proposed duty as an employee, in conjunction with his cultural obligations (Price 433-36). Upon signing a contract of employment with Motorola, Tommy both implicitly and explicitly agreed to follow company policies, to labor at the best of his ability, and to act with integrity (Employment). As evident by his actions, not only did Tommy fail to fulfill these requirements, he completely demeaned his own cultural values of obligation, at the same time. In addition, in conjunction with these ideals of agreement and concord, the Anzen facility strongly emphasized safety awareness. Safety consciousness was a hallmark of this enterprise. Tommy, as an employee at Motorola for two years, was most definitely aware of this indication. Thus, by failing to terminate Tommy’s contract, Stan is promoting employee defiance, while degrading proposed company values (Price 433-36)
In addition to Tommy, Victor failed to act justly and righteously, in accordance with Arete, as described in Virtue Ethics. While Victor was a very proficient manager, he had no right, under any circumstances, to strike an employee; despite Tommy’s continual defiance, striking an employee, on the part of Victor, was in no way justifiable. Victor’s actions were synonymous with a complete lack of control and responsibility, displaying poor character. With his corporate standing, Victor’s actions were completely unacceptable. As a manager, Victor was responsible for conducting himself professionally with integrity in the highest regard. Yet his actions reflected negative personal temperament. As a result, this certainly reflected badly on the firm’ management or front office. Victor’s disposition, displayed through his actions, reflected infamy, instead of what was expected from an employee of his standing, a demeanor of rectitude, reflecting integrity (Price 433-36).
The second tenet of Virtue Ethics is Phronesis or practical moral reasoning. Both Tommy and Victor failed to properly employ this principle into their functioning, as employees for Motorola.(As defined in class) Ethics is a code of conduct, acceptable by a group of people, which promotes the greater good (class notes). As an individual, Tommy lacked moral maturity and good intention, and thus, failed to act with integrity, according to ethical code. He intentionally broke company policies to fulfill his own wishes. Furthermore, he disobeyed his superior officers; as an employee, Tommy had an ethical obligation to obey his superiors and follow company procedures. His disobedience and complete lack of respect for authority displayed poor conduct and weak moral fiber. Similarly to Tommy, Victor, through blatant his actions, acted unethically and immorally. Through his actions, Victor showed complete disregard to the intrinsic value of a human being, in addition to displaying complete lack of control. Instead of controlling his anger and relieving his hostility through verbal means, Victor used violence to discipline Tommy. Acting according to impulse out of anger, while failing to assert reason into his decision, Victor committed assault and battery. In doing so, Victor intentionally sought to harm Tommy (Under no circumstances was Victor’s act socially acceptable). This inexcusable act displayed a complete lack of professionalism and respect. Victor’s assault in no way sought to mirror the ideals of integrity and compassion that entail Virtue Ethics. As a result of this crime, in order to maintain the integrity of the firm, Victor’s employment at Motorola must be terminated (Any another method of action would essentially promote violence) (Price 433-36).
The third component of Virtue Ethics is Eudamonia, or happiness. As implied above, Victor’s and Tommy’s actions failed to bring about happiness or prosperity. Rather, instead of bringing about flourishing, this incident initiated a serious corporate conflict. From a personal standpoint, following the incident, Tommy was very regretful of not complying with company procedures. He apologized to his superiors and promised to abide by company policies in the future. In terms of Victor, he was very ashamed of his actions, as evident by his donation of money to Tommy (as a form of repentance). Clearly, Victor was unaware that he acted unjustifiably and, thus, was regretful. Instead of acting in accordance with virtue, both men acted in accordance with vice, dishonor, and immorality (Price 433-36).
Works Cited
Case Study: What Price Safety "Employment Questions And Answers." Compact Law. 11 Feb. 2009
<http://www.compactlaw.co.uk/ monster/empq7.html>.