Business Ethics & Financial Management homework assessments

BBA 4751, Business Ethics 1

UNIT IV STUDY GUIDE

Employer Responsibilities and

Employee Rights

Course Learning Outcomes for Unit IV Upon completion of this unit, students should be able to:

1. Discuss the two distinct perspectives on the ethics of workplace relationships.

2. Define “employment at will” (EAW) and its ethical rationale. 3. Explain the difference between intrinsic and instrumental value in terms

of health and safety. 4. Explain the benefits and challenges of diversity for the workplace. 5. Define affirmative action and explain the three ways in which affirmative

action may be legally permissible. 6. Describe the ethical sources of privacy as a fundamental value. 7. Articulate the manner in which employee monitoring works. 8. Discuss the ethics of monitoring as it applies to polygraphs, genetic

testing, and other forms of surveillance. 9. Explain why ethics is important in the business environment.

Unit Lesson This unit encompasses two chapters in our textbook; both pertain to ethical decision making in the workplace. The first of the two, Chapter 6, explores areas of ethical decision making where the law has some applicability and yet is constantly evolving. Ethics in the workplace can be considered from at least two perspectives. First, an employer could adopt an approach that treats employees well for the sake of the results that it will produce. The alternative approach is one in which the employer believes that people are owed a certain level of respect and dignity as human beings in the workplace, regardless of output or outcome. It should be apparent that the first approach is based in utilitarian principles, and the second in deontological principles. It should also be apparent that the concept of employment entails ethics due to the inherent relationship between the employer and the employee and the control, power, and influence the former has over the latter. Therefore, the concept of due process is a key component of ethical decision making. Due process is the right to be protected against the arbitrary use of authority. However, due process does not guarantee employment. As a matter of law, most employees in the U.S. are employed under the legal doctrine of employment at will. Employment at will has the pragmatic effect that an employee can be hired at will, fired at will, and can leave a job at will (without any form of notice). However, there are some legal protections in place, (such as those related to

Reading Assignment Chapter 6: Ethical Decision Making: Employer Responsibilities and Employee Rights, pp. 261-302 Chapter 7: Ethical Decision Making: Technology and Privacy in the Workplace, pp. 335-371

Suggested Reading See information below.

BBA 4751, Business Ethics 2

civil rights), which prohibit dismissal on the ground of membership in a certain class or group (race, sex, disability, age, national origin, religion, or ethnic background). Another concept related to employment at will is the idea is just cause. Just cause is the contention that an employer should be able to justify (via evidence) the dismissal of an employee. Currently, the burden of proof in cases of alleged discrimination is on the employee (i.e., he or she must demonstrate that the dismissal falls into one of the legal exceptions to employment at will). In reaction to downturns in the economy (or other factors), organizations sometimes engage in mass reductions in the work force also known as downsizing. The concept of downsizing is not necessarily an ethical issue in and of itself. Rather, it is the method or process in which downsizing is implemented that implicates ethics and ethical decision making. For example, the following questions all have ethical implications. Who will be selected for downsizing? Will one group (e.g., workers over 50 years of age) be affected disproportionately? How will the process be communicated and implemented? How will all stakeholders be affected? Have alternatives to downsizing been identified and explored? Working conditions are an additional consideration for ethics in the workplace. However, the extent of an employer’s responsibilities for the health and safety of workers is an area of ongoing debate. The attributes of health and safety have instrumental value because they result in productivity for the organization. At the same time, these attributes also have intrinsic value in that they are attributes of human beings’ lives: something that we believe to be priceless. The U.S. has a government organization that is charged with establishing health and safety standards in the workplace. OSHA, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, was established in 1970, and there is an ongoing debate about the methodology that should be used by that organization to determine workplace safety: the safest feasible standards vs. a cost-benefit analysis approach. There are many ethical aspects to the latter approach, not the least of which is the concept of putting a price on people’s health and their lives. Nevertheless, such an approach may be one of the few objective means to measure health and safety in the workplace. Other important dynamics of the workplace that are covered in Chapter 6 of our textbook include child labor, discrimination, diversity, and affirmative action. Chapter 7 of our textbook focuses on the issues of privacy in the workplace and how the advancement of technology has created challenges to that somewhat vague concept. In general, there are two aspects to the concept of privacy. The first is a presumed right to be “left alone,” and the second is the presumed right to control information about oneself. Such presumed rights are founded on an individual’s fundamental, universal right to autonomy and in our right to make decisions about our personal existence. When considering this idea in the workplace, the concept of reciprocal obligation implies that although an employee has an obligation to

BBA 4751, Business Ethics 3

respect the goals and property of the employer, the employer has a

reciprocal obligation to respect the rights of the employee, including the employee’s right to privacy. The idea of rights brings the concept of hypernorms into the discussion because the perceived universal rights, such as freedom of speech, personal freedom, informed consent, right to privacy, and the like, are basic and fundamental to all civilized human existence. However, the introduction and advancement of technology in the workplace creates significant challenges for all stakeholders. For example, traditionally, many would consider photographs to be private. However, social media has become extremely popular and many choose to share photographs of themselves with others. Moreover, technology affords employers the ability (and the right?) to monitor employees in the workplace in many forms including email monitoring, Internet monitoring, video monitoring, cell phone and text messaging monitoring, etc. The ability to monitor does not address the ethical aspect of whether monitoring should be done. However, when company property is used, the concept of property rights also comes into play, which complicates the issues even more. Additional forms of monitoring in the workplace include drug testing, polygraphs, background, and psychological testing. There are many questions that remain about ethical decision making in the workplace that are related to these complex issues. Nevertheless, an approach that remains sensitive to the concerns of employees and strives toward a balance that respects individual dignity while holding individuals accountable for their particular roles in an organization offers a considered approach to these issues.

Reference Hartman, L. P., DesJardins, J., & MacDonald, C. (2014). Business ethics:

Decision making for personal integrity & social responsibility (3rd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Suggested Reading Click here to access the PDF of the Chapter 6 Presentation. Click here to access the PDF of the Chapter 7 Presentation. McMahon, J. M. (2009, March). Lost in cyberspace: ethical decision making in

the online environment. Ethics and Information Technology, 11(1), 1-17.

Pandiani, J. A., Banks, S. M., & Schacht, L. M. (1998, November). Personal

privacy versus public accountability: A technological solution to an ethical dilemma. Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research. 25(4), 456.

Hodson, T. J., Englander, F. & Englander, V. (1999). Ethical, legal and

economic aspects of monitoring employee electronic mail. Journal of Business Ethics, 19(1), 99-108.