Sometimes, employees of different organizations are obliged to face the problem of workplace fairness and justice. Such an issue might be influenced by a plethora of factors. One of them is numerical framing that is usually wrong interpreted by workers. The following paper will discuss the problem of workplace fairness and justice in various contexts and examples.
The development of systems supporting positive perceptions of workplace justice
According to Moon (2017), the performance and productivity rate of some employees is dependent on their informational, procedural, interpersonal, and distributive justice climates. The hypothesis of the scholar’s article says that these factors might have both positive and negative effects. Basing on the study by Kwong and Wong (2012), it is clear that numerical framing might have a significant influence on the justice climate among the members of the group mentioned above. For instance, employees may perceive and understand such data as the rate of their productivity and impact on their company’s profit negatively if they see the low percentage (Barua & Mani, 2014). However, it is essential to remember that even if the presented number is low at the moment, it has to be compared with the previous period’s index, which might be even lower.
In order to make the workers’ perception positive, it is essential to present all the data from its best side. For instance, if people think that their company does not sell thirteen percent of the produced materials, it would be proper to say that the organization realizes approximately eighty-seven percent of its products (Shaw, 2014). Such an approach might influence people’s set of mind and make them think positively. In turn, their mood will have a positive impact on the quality of produced materials, which may increase the sales rate even more.
Levi Strauss’s decision to close its South Zarzamora Street plant
The advantages of closing Levi’s garment factory in South Zarzamora Street implied lowering the workers’ wages as citizens of other countries required approximately six dollars per day, whereas American residents needed to be paid the same price an hour. However, there were some negative outcomes of the USA plant closing (Hsieh, 2017). The clothing firm was obliged to pay approximately half a million dollars to employ people who were left without workplaces because of the closed factory. Also, Levi Strauss’s sales significantly dropped due to multiple public protests. Moreover, consumers knew this strategy of the jeans manufacturer and avoided buying its production because of their moral principles.
A sound business decision in the given case was to employ all the former workers of the Levi Strauss Company. This move gave the firm additional credit form the U.S. citizens. Indeed, it was a socially responsible decision because it influenced many people’s lives (Hsieh, 2017). The company could have reasonably expected to keep the South Zarzamora plant running. However, it was better to outsource the production process as it impacted the lowering of the firm’s prices and manufacturing expenses as well.
With regard to Levi Strauss’s conduct both at home and abroad, it makes sense to talk about the company as a morally responsible agent whose actions can be critically assessed. The statement above is based on the fact that the firm’s actions influence other people’s lives and living standards. However, if the organization directors think only about the people they employ, they might not address the needs of other American residents as the lower clothing process might let them save their finances on shopping.
Ethical responsibilities of pharmaceutical companies
Given the nature of their product, pharmaceutical companies have ethical responsibilities that other corporations do not have as their services are necessary for some people’s lives. Sometimes, the absence of immediate access to appropriate medicaments might become a reason of a patient’s death or other unfortunate outcomes (Leopold, Chambers, & Wagner, 2016). Large U.S. drug companies cannot be considered good corporate citizens as they make extra money on the country’s citizens’ primary needs. Medical workers should help other individuals in case of different health issues, diseases, and traumas. Unfortunately, the owners of pharmacies forget about people’s financial difficulties.
Pharmaceutical companies have even more moral obligations when it comes to making life-saving drugs available. The high prices of such medicaments make people suffer from their diseases. It would be morally right to lower the prices of these medical items as their absence causes multiple deaths. People who do not help other individuals in such situations might be considered responsible for their clients’ departures. Although life-saving drugs are important, other medicines might be essential for American citizens as well because they may have severe pains due to their inability to purchase appropriate medicaments (Leopold et al., 2016). This explanation reflects on the organizations’ need to be socially responsible by pharmacists’ intervention or refusal to help different patients with important drugs. The business’s owners’ greed should not overweigh regular people’s needs.
Conclusion
Despite the profitable and operational consideration in any business, the needs of other people, who might be negatively influenced by different companies’ strategies, have to be evaluated as well. It is essential to remember that private firms work to satisfy their clients and provide particular individuals with jobs. Unfortunately, some businesspeople forget about this rule and prefer to enrich themselves, instead of making their clients benefit from the services that the patients cover financially.
References
Barua, A., & Mani, D. (2014). Augmenting conflict resolution with informational response: A holistic view of governance choice in business process outsourcing. Journal of Management Information Systems, 31(3), 72-105. Web.
Hsieh, N. (2017). The responsibilities and role of business in relation to society: Back to basics? Business Ethics Quarterly, 27(02), 293-314. Web.
Kwong, J. Y., & Wong, K. F. (2012). Fair or not fair? The effects of numerical framing on the perceived justice of outcomes. Journal of Management, 40(6), 1558-1582. Web.
Leopold, C., Chambers, J. D., & Wagner, A. K. (2016). Thirty years of media coverage on high drug prices in the United States—A never-ending story or a time for change? Value in Health, 19(1), 14-16. Web.
Moon, K. (2017). Fairness at the organizational level: Examining the effect of organizational justice climate on collective turnover rates and organizational performance. Public Personnel Management, 46(2), 118-143. Web.
Shaw, W. H. (2014). Business ethics (8th ed.). Boston, MA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.