Employer Breach of Employee’s Privacy
Though technically being very hard to prove, the breach of employees’ privacy is definitely a punishable offence that must result in taking proper measures and penalizing the wrong-doer in an adequate manner (Duff, Smielauskas & Yvos 2001, p. 14; Dossey 2003, p. 12). As Shaw explains, “privacy is widely acknowledged today to be a fundamental right, yet corporate behavior and policies often threaten privacy” (Shaw 2013, p. 379).
To secure the employees’ privacy from corporations, the principle of workplace privacy was defined (Ball, Daniel & Stride 2012, p. 377). To solve the given issue, the principle of consequentialist theories can be used, i.e., the rightness of the employees’ actions can be evaluated only by its results.
It is quite peculiar that the given principle contradicts the Kantian theory, i.e., the Categorical Imperative, which is widely accepted in other aspects of an organization’s functioning.
Employer Breach of Other Civil Liberties
Apart from infringing their employees’ rights for their privacy, companies also tend to cross the thin line between strict rules and downright injustice concerning other civil liberties (Rosembloom 2002, p. 58). As Shaw explains, in most cases, the given issue is manifested through making employees work extra hours without offering them additional payment. On the one hand, the given demand seems absurd.
However, it should be mentioned that the given demand is often voiced when employees actually fail to perform their duties on time. Therefore, the demand to compensate for the lack of efficiency seems legitimate (Paterson 2012, p. 1). It can be assumed that the solution to the given issue lies within the boundaries of the Utilitarianism theory (Shaw 2013), presupposing a compromise between an employee and a manager.
This could be considered as another manifestation of consequentialist theories; however, in the given example, the well-being of all those involved is being considered, which sets the given approach and the Kantian ethics apart.
Compared to Kant’s concept of good will, which is going to be considered further, the idea of introducing Utilitarianism might seem somewhat conflicting with Kantian principles, since the former presuppose that one has to take actions that will be in favor of both sides of the argument, yet does not specify that these actions must be taken willingly.
Agency Relations
Being loyal to the company is one of the requirements that employees have to meet in order to retain their jobs, which, at first, seems quite legitimate. However, as Shaw notes, there might be more than meets the eye in that demand (Gallicano 2013, p. 222).
As Shaw explains, “it would be morally simplistic to view employees simply as agents of their employers or to expect them subordinate entirely their autonomy and private lives to the organization” (Shaw 2012, p. 374). As one might have already noticed, the demand of employees’ loyalty echoes with the previous concern for the employees’ civil liberties.
To solve the given dilemma, Kant’s principle of good will (Shaw 2013, p. 74) should be introduced. Unlike the consequentialist approach, which focuses on the outcomes rather than on the intentions, Kant’s ethics allows for reconciling with the principles of ethics and making a conscious choice, which is extremely important for ethical growth.
Childcare and Maternity Leave
While discrimination is a hideous phenomenon that does not have the right to exist, it still has certain arguments to be based on. One of the key arguments in gender profiling concerns the myth that married women are more devoted to their families than they are to their jobs and, as a result, perform worse than men.
A truly weird logical twist, it leads to the employers’ fear that their female workers will sooner or later have children, engage into childcare and household and stop caring about the quality of their work. As a result, once a female worker declares that she is going to take a short hiatus while she deals with childcare or is pregnant, an employer is most likely to consider this woman a number one candidate for being dismissed.
To fight the given type of discrimination, another peculiar strategy has been developed. According to what Show says, in most companies, a paid leave is offered so that women could feel better. However, in many respects, the given issue can be related to the theory of egoism (Shaw 2013, p. 65), which employers clearly follow by pursuing their own interests instead of the ones of their employees.
Gender Discrimination in the Workplace
The way in which the given problem is suggested to be approached can be defined as the efficient use of consequentialist theories. Indeed, when considering the given approach closer, one will inevitably notice the fact that in the given case, financial reward is being offered to the victims of discrimination.
The given method contradicts the basic postulates of Utilitarianism and Kant’s ethics, which teaches to choose the methods leaving both sides of the argument consent. In the given case the employer is clearly being left to pay for the moral damage of the employees.
Hence, at least one side of the conflict is supposed to pay for its mistakes. However, the idea of offering the staff a material compensation of their suffering can be seen as an attempt to compromise, since, in the worst case scenario, i.e., the employee leaving, the company is going to suffer even more.
There is no secret that women are often underestimated in the business world. Despite the fact that it has been quite long since the feminist movement started and that a number of steps have been taken to promote equality in the relationship between men and women, the latter being often underpaid (Coleman 2000, p. 38) and facing the glass ceiling problem (Bosse & Taylor 2012, 52).
However, according to what Shaw says, there is a possible way out of the given dead end. By adopting the so-called comparable worth strategy, one can possibly avoid the instances of gender profiling in the workplace. As Shaw explains, the given principle presupposes that women and men are paid equality for doing not only the same job, but also different jobs involving the same amount of skill and qualification (Shaw 2013, p. 395).
The chosen method is quite legitimate from the position of Kantian and Utilitarianism ethics. Indeed, the elements of Categorical Imperative, i.e., treating the opponents the way in which one wishes to be treated, is an obvious addition to the policy towards women.
Age Discrimination
Another deplorable aspect of inequality within a contemporary society, age discrimination occurs when a specific age group is in the minority and, therefore, can easily be headed against younger employees as well as the senior ones.
While the given problem is quite hard to address properly due to the obvious arguments of the discrimination proponents concerning the inefficiency of either “too old” or “too young” employees, it is still possible to solve once the proper strategy is utilized (Hatch & Hall 2003, p. 65).
According to Shaw, the given issue can be solved by adopting the principles of consequentialist approach. In other words, for Shaw, the ends justify the means. The given principle, however, can also be viewed through the lens of Kantian theory of Categorical Imperative, according to which, every opponent must be treated in the same way as one wishes to be treated by his/her opponents.
Reference List
Ball, K Daniel, E M & Stride, C 2012, ‚Dimensions of employee prinacy: an empirical study‘, Information Technology and People, vol. 25 no. 4, pp. 376–394.
Bosse, D A & Taylor, P L 2012, ‘The second glass ceiling impedes women entrepreneurs’, Journal of Applied Management and Entrepreneurship, vol. 17. No. 1, pp. 52–67.
Coleman, M S 2000, ‘Undercpounted and underpaid heroines’, Working USA, vol. 3 no. 5, pp. 37–65.
Duff, W M, Smielauskas, W & Yvos, H 2001, ‘Protecting privacy’, Management Journal, vol. 35 no. 2, pp. 14–30.
Dossey, L 2013, ‘Privacy,’ Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine, vol. 9 no. 3, pp. 12–120.
Gallicano, T D 2013, ‘Relationship management with the Millenial generation of public relations agency employees’, Journal of Public Relaitons, vol. 24 no. 3, p. 222.
Hatch, D D & Hall, G E 2003, ‘Age discrimination in benefits among older employees’, Workforce, vol. 83 no. 5, p. 65.
Paterson, J 2012, ‘Civil liberties under fire’, Institute of Public Affairs Review, vol. 64 no. 4, p. 1.
Rosembloom, D H 2002, ‘Public administration and civil liberties’, Public Administration Review, vol. 62 no. S1, p. 58.
Shaw, B 2013, ‘Normative theories of ethics’, in B Shaw (eds), Moral issues in business, Cengage Learning, Stamford, CT, pp. 58–114.