1
Jessica Collins
BUSI643: Workforce Planning and Employment
October 10, 2025
Respectfully submitted to: Dr. Mary Jo Odom-Dull
2
When organizations force employees out by tasking them with things that will eventually
make them quit, it looks bad on the organization internally. The reason is because it shows how
managers are not trained properly to take care of problematic employees. If there are rules
being broken or behavioral issues, then that should automatically warrant disciplinary actions
and then termination. But if this is an employee who is not performing as expected, and the
company wants to get rid of them- this is still an issue. “Most existing research examining
communication during organizational dismissal focuses on two key players: the terminated
employee and the message carrier, who is often the employee’s supervisor, a manager, or a
member of human resources” (Benedict, 2020, p. 495).
The National Labor Relations Acts outlines progressive disciplinary action that should be
taken against employees before termination is considered. The act outlines the stages in which
disciplinary actions are taken and increase in severity if the behavior is unchanged. It starts with
an informal warning then progresses to written warning, suspension, and finally termination.
Job- relevant criteria for entering the progressive discipline cycle should be outlined and
communicated to all employees and their supervisors. Such criteria can include
consistently low levels of productivity, low levels of cooperation, failure to communicate,
customer complaints, noncompliance with safety procedures, lateness, absenteeism, or
violations of other policies (Judge, & Kammeyer-Mueller, 2022, p. 740)
With guidance like this it seems unethical to put pressure on an employee to quit after putting
them through tasks that are beneath them or not aligned with their duty title. If anything, it
seems like this can bring on a lawsuit against the company for not taking the proper steps to
deal with an employee. There is also another angle that is missed when a supervisor does not
take the time to counsel an employee properly. Because of anxiety or fear that the employee
will lash out, the supervisor does not get the opportunity to offer feedback or guidance on how
to acquire a new job. “To help supervisors with the difficult task of a layoff meeting, they should
3
be given formal training in how to conduct dismissal meetings and engage in role-playing
exercises” (Judge, & Kammeyer-Mueller, 2022, p. 744). This will only benefit them in the long
run to help them become better managers. Proverbs 13:20 says, “Whoever walks with the wise
becomes wise, but the companion of fools will suffer harm” (King James Bible, 1769/2021). A
termination does not have to mean bad blood; it should be a learning lesson for both parties.
When the opportunity is missed, both parties have let a valuable lesson pass them by.
The question of this prompt almost makes one want to consider wrongfully dismissing an
employee, and this is how they make someone quit since they cannot fire them without being
sued. If that is the case, there are quite a few ethical issues here. “Unfair termination of
employment refers to the procedure of dismissing an employee without providing a legitimate
reason for the dismissal. It is the dismissal of an employee from their job for reasons that are
not legally justified” (Muhammed, 2021, p. 158). There is another conversation about how
employees are at the will of the employers. This might be true, but there is still a process to
follow.
Under the Employment-At-Will (EAW) regime of employment law, employees are in an
important sense in a more precarious position than employees in places with for-cause
employment. As the EAW critics argue, this can undermine employee freedom and make
employees vulnerable to unethical treatment at the hands of their employers (Bhargava
&
Young, 2022, p. 521)
With these kinds of principles intact inside of organizations, practices like what was mentioned
in the ethical question will keep happening, as wrong as it is.
References
Benedict, B. C. (2020). Examining the experiences of remaining employees after a coworker
4
dismissal: Initial message characteristics, information seeking, uncertainty, and
perceived social costs. Management Communication Quarterly, 34(4), 495-526.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318920949327
Bhargava, V. R., & Young, C. (2022). The ethics of employment-at-will: An institutional
complementarities approach. Business Ethics Quarterly, 32(4), 519–545.
doi:10.1017/beq.2021.40
Judge, T. A., & Kammeyer-Mueller, J. D. (2022). Staffing organizations (10th ed.). Burr Ridge,
IL: McGraw Hill.
King James Bible. (2021). King James Bible Online. https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/
(Original work published 1769)
Mohammed, S. (2021). Legal termination of employment: Investigating the relationship
between performance appraisal and legal termination. Journal of Humanities and
Education Development. 3. 158-166. 10.22161/jhed.3.3.17.
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
