In case of a company hiring a younger team force and cutting off the older employees, there are several possibilities that would be acceptable and fair to each group. Because the younger population has finished their studies and is in need of a job or career development, companies must do their best to hire them.
It is necessary for the new employees to get the experience and choice in what they want to pursue. Mistreating previous employees who have reached a certain age is, however, not acceptable. The fact that they have deep knowledge of the company and have input many years proves that they are loyal and have become a part of the organization.
The company is successful partly due to their efforts and skills, as they have contributed to the organization and have not left during many years of work. There must be a balance between the new incoming force and the one who has seniority. Not only does the company risk, entrusting its matters to inexperienced employees, thus hurting its profits and reputation, it might also create predisposition where people will analyze the company’s treatment of previous employees and would not want to stay for the long term.
In case more mature individuals are offered a 50 per cent cut in their salaries and they have nothing against such policies, it could be acceptable but there would have to be a unified agreement between all employees, as it would be unfair for some to get cut and others to have unchanged salaries. Another option is to decrease the number of hours for either group or offer a choice of different benefits, salaries, and hours.
When an employer looks to hire a person who is pregnant or has any other condition that can affect the work temporarily, it would be against policies and human rights to decline the application.
Since the law states that people with short-term disabilities must be hired or kept in the workplace, the same conditions apply to women who are pregnant (Bennet-Alexander & Hartman, 2011). It is possible to see another perspective where after hiring a person and going through a training and assimilation period, they go on a maternity leave and are unable to work for a year.
It would be clear that employer cannot afford to spend time and resources to look for another employee within such a short time. Moreover, if the person’s condition gravely affects the working abilities and the structure of the company has to be changed in a major way as to meet their needs, it can be assumed that such action would be unreasonable. Even though there is a law that addresses such cases, from a moral perspective, the employer has a responsibility to give everyone an equal chance.
There is no doubt that some people have conditions that society has not developed techniques to properly adjust to, and so everything must be done to meet the needs of people who do need specific environmental requirements. The balance between human rights and equal opportunities must be kept in all instances, as all people deserve a chance to prove themselves and input their skills into the society.
The workplace system has many deficiencies, as people are only starting to recognize unique qualities of individuals. It is up to the government and corporations to make sure that laws and policies are upheld and enforced.
Reference
Bennet-Alexander, D., & Hartman, L. (2011). Employment Law for Business. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.