Steven Ross decided to get away cleanly with the deeds he was involved in while working for Harrison-Lockington. He did this by having revealled to Jack Gordon, managing partner, how he was embezzling the company finances. He was responsible for all the non-legal professional matters in the company, such as facilities, charitable donations, human resources, payroll, social activities, and marketing. He was reporting to Tom Welch, chief operating officer at head office, Toronto. Due to his responsibilities, he was able to take away about $300,000 through the payroll system, and office expenses, where he could single-handedly sign for expenditure any amount below $1,000. He could also sign together with any partner in the office, including Gordon, by issuing payroll cheques through his authority to expend. Somebody at the head office has questioned some expenses by having highlighted the same to Ross. However, the questionable expenses reached the office of Tom Welch, and investigation has begun. Tom Welch booked an appointment with Ross seeking for an explanation. Ross realized that he could not be off the hook for long, he would be caught, and thus he just confessed to Gordon.
We will write a custom Essay on Law Company’s Case and Utilitarian Ethical Approach specifically for you
301 certified writers online
Utilitarian ethical approach premises on the moral principle that the morally right act is the one which esteblishes a good balance of benefits over negative effects on everyone affected. If the action provides maximum positives to all those involved, it does not matter if some coercion, manipulation or lies have been involved in the process of reaching the goal. The advantages are magnified and weighted against the negatives or harms that the action may cause.
The firm will not let a person of Ross’ caliber remain in service, as he is to be relieved of his duties. Therefore, Gordon and Tom have to discuss how to terminate his services forthwith but secure the files which need an immediate thorough investigation at Gordon’s office to minimize any fallout that can occur. Gordon then adviced Ross to take a compulsory leave for further direction. The act that Ross did should not be fully explained to the staff members, especially the support staff. The reson behind it is that it could cause some staff to try to use the same idea to embezzle the company finances. Any staff member might be promoted to take Ross’ place, so having known that beforehnd, the last would have tried to discover new ways to make quick money and leave. The fact that an office manager has the ability to sign for expenditure on amounts less than $1,000 poses a high risk if other staff members know this. Though Ross was eventually relieved of his duties, all the circumstances under which he was sacked were not explained to all. Gordon and Tom discussed the circumstances under the case regarding the kind of investigation to be done while Ross was handed to the law enforcement agencies to help secure all the company information from being interfered with in the process.
The law firm should have taken care of its reputation by having relieved Ross of his duties as well as having ensured that the investigation to come along could not be the subject of public scrutiny. The company could, through Tom and Gordon, ask Ross to resign humanely and go to the law enforcement agencies without informing anyone else of what had happened. According to company records, Ross resigned for personal reasons in order not to create fuzz in the office.