UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY, SYDNEY > Student Presentation 21 Sexual Misconduct and Taxes, Morality and Ethics Johanan Ottensooser: 10873305 MAY 6, 2009 Introduction: This presentation is structured as follows: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Analysis of the case study Definitions Analysis through critical frames, personal morality and ethics My personal opinion Conclusion Analysis of the Case Study Beatrice has worked for BigBank as a small business advisor for several years and would like to be promoted to an advisor in the large corporate division. Her immediate boss Phillip is about to be promoted to Associate Director of the bank. Beatrice thinks that the opportunity should now be ripe to be promoted to the large corporate level as Phillip is moving on from his present position. Phillip has always been a friendly and fair boss but has the reputation of “living life to the full”. In particular, he is often seen at upmarket nightspots and is renowned for giving extremely expensive bottles of champagne to his staff every time he obtains a new client. He also often invites his staff out on his cruiser. On one of these cruises Beatrice said to Phillip “I know the bank’s doing OK, but I didn’t think even you could pay for a boat like this.” Phillip replied.” The maintenance of this boat is negligible. I pay cash in hand for every repair and I save a fortune – If you ever buy a boat go and see Billy Fixit at the marina and tell him to look after you. After all the Tax Department gets enough out of me because it is all taken out of my salary before I get it... That’s the advantage for people who have their own business” Phillip also seems to have selected as his work team nearly all young attractive women. One of these, Emma recently was promoted much to the surprise of the other members of the team after she had spent the weekend with Phillip on his cruiser. Beatrice congratulated Emma for this sudden promotion and Emma said, “I think my weekend away with Phillip made it easier. I just hope his wife doesn’t find out. Of course, it’s not only Phillip that does it- it’s just about everyone in senior management except the Chairman of Directors. Just watch me work my way up the corporate ladder.” If you were Beatrice would you: a) try and raise Phillip’s conduct with the Chairman of the Bank; b) contact Phillip’s wife and tell her what Phillip is doing; c) report your suspicions about Billy Fixit to the Tax Department Explain the ethical implications that each of the above alternative actions raise for Beatrice. Part a) The first possible course of action is divulging the information known: Phillip’s proclivity towards sexuality in the workplace, and, therefore, his slightly slanted form of Nepotism as well as his excessive expenses and tax fraud. This is, therefore, an official complaint in the light of personal as well as workplace misdemeanour. Part a) could also be seen as asking the fundamental question of the judging the ethicalness of sexuality as well as nepotism in a work environment. Part a) is a question on Ethics. Part b) The second outcome reveals Phillip’s infidelity, and, perhaps, his other misdemeanours to his wife: a personal response to a personal affront. Part b) could be surmised as asking the question of external involvement in personal issues, as well as the partner’s right to know about an infidelity. Part b) is a question on Morality. Part c) The third outcome is different from the other two as it presents a legal, in fact possible criminal accusation against Mr Phillip. Our judgement on Part c) is quite important, as it touches on the issue of whether or not it is recommended or required to report illegalities, legally, ethically and morally. Part c) is a question on Legality, Ethics and Morality. Definitions: There are a few definitions central to this debate: Morals Morals are a comprehensive set of personal values (which often align with those of a social group, religion, etc.). Ethics Ethics can be defined as an aggregation of societal morality. Law The law is a formal aggregation of rules, based on morality and ethics. This is, however, an informal definition. The “neo-analytical” school of jurisprudence provides a much more thorough definition of the above (Lancaster & Meltz, 2009, p. 20). They define morals as social norms that are either habit or rule. They define ethics as social norms that are a rule, as well as enforceable, either by obligation or criticism. They define laws as social norms that are an enforceable rule, enforced by physical sanction: i.e. a punishment. Other required definitions: Nepotism: favouritism shown to relatives or close friends by those in power (Princeton, 2009) Analysis through frames Ethics is an intrinsically difficult frame of analysis, since it is deeply personal and has had many philosophical incarnations. However, one is able to analyse the abovementioned scenario via different ethical and philosophical frames. In week 1, we discussed Jurisprudence. The frames presented here are extracted from the first two lectures, and are as follows: Frame General Morals Description View the issue against the forces of Character and Character Diminution (Dababneh, BLEthics Tutorial “Tutorial 1, 2 - Jurisprudence”, 2009)1 a) No b) No c) No View the issues against societal standards of Character and Character Diminution (Watson, 2005, pp. 540-550) Naturalists View law, morality and ethics as based on “god’s law”: Notably St Thomas Aquinas2 Utalitarianists View the same though as to service the “most good for the most people ” Feminists View the question through a gynocentric trope Some other Frames from my research Judaic Law Views ethics as natural law does, through it is strictly encoded Australian Law One is not required to report a witnessed crime unless it is continuing Total Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes No Yes Yes Yes - No No Yes Yes No No 5 2 3 General Ethics 1 See Appendix 1 I have adapted Aquinas’ theory on whether it is required to obey law (stating that it depends on civil unrest and natural law (Lancaster & Meltz, 2009, pp. 9, 10)) to be used as a ethical frame: if an action is not legally required, it must only be done if it does not cause civil unrest. 2 My Opinion a) Since Mr Phillips’ actions constitute sexual assault, as well as Nepotism (since he promoted those with which he had special relations), and this personally affected Beatrice (since she lost out on being promoted) – as well as the large scope of the “crime” and the director’s seeming naïveté, I believe that Beatrice is being moral (since it affects her personally) and ethical (since she is showing moral courage in exposing this widespread crime) in exposing the scandal to the Director b) Since the affair occurred between Mr Phillips and another, and does not personally affect Beatrice, it would be socially wrong, wounding and immoral to tell the wife. c) Beatrice is not legally required to tell the Tax Department of Mr Phillips’ and Mr Fixit’s alleged crimes, neither does she have evidence to prove them. Furthermore, considering the confidence Mr Phillips placed in her, it would be morally wrong of her to tell the Tax Department. If she were to, however, it would be ethically justifiable as courageous, as well as reflective of inner strength, not to mention standing up for the good of “society”. However, I would still recommend to Beatrice not to tell the Tax Department Appendix 1: “The Forces of Character Diminution (Dababneh, Tutorial 8 - Revision, 2009)” Character Character Diminution Empathy Acquisitive Opportunism Honesty Apathy Moral courage Greed Integrity Moral Cowardace Bibliography Dababneh, B. (2009). BLEthics Tutorial “Tutorial 1, 2 - Jurisprudence”. Dababneh, B. (2009, Week 8). Tutorial 8 - Revision. Slide 5. Lancaster, J., & Meltz, D. (2009). 79203 Business Law and Ethics, based on Business Law [Gibson and Fraser]. (4, Ed.) Sydney: Pearson Education, Australia. Princeton. (n.d.). Definition of Nepotism. Retrieved April 30, 2009, from Princeton Wordnet: http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=nepotism Watson, P. (2005). Ideas - A History from Fire to Freud. London: W&N. Slide 1 – [email protected] for handout and extended Jurisprudence notes Analysis of the Case Study Beatrice has worked for BigBank as a small business advisor for several years and would like to be promoted to an advisor in the large corporate division. Her immediate boss Phillip is about to be promoted to Associate Director of the bank. Beatrice thinks that the opportunity should now be ripe to be promoted to the large corporate level as Phillip is moving on from his present position. Phillip has always been a friendly and fair boss but has the reputation of “living life to the full”. In particular, he is often seen at upmarket nightspots and is renowned for giving extremely expensive bottles of champagne to his staff every time he obtains a new client. He also often invites his staff out on his cruiser. On one of these cruises Beatrice said to Phillip “I know the bank’s doing OK, but I didn’t think even you could pay for a boat like this.” Phillip replied.” The maintenance of this boat is negligible. I pay cash in hand for every repair and I save a fortune – If you ever buy a boat go and see Billy Fixit at the marina and tell him to look after you. After all the Tax Department gets enough out of me because it is all taken out of my salary before I get it... That’s the advantage for people who have their own business” Phillip also seems to have selected as his work team nearly all young attractive women. One of these, Emma recently was promoted much to the surprise of the other members of the team after she had spent the weekend with Phillip on his cruiser. Beatrice congratulated Emma for this sudden promotion and Emma said, “I think my weekend away with Phillip made it easier. I just hope his wife doesn’t find out. Of course, it’s not only Phillip that does it- it’s just about everyone in senior management except the Chairman of Directors. Just watch me work my way up the corporate ladder.” If you were Beatrice would you: a) try and raise Phillip’s conduct with the Chairman of the Bank; b) contact Phillip’s wife and tell her what Phillip is doing; c) report your suspicions about Billy Fixit to the Tax Department Explain the ethical implications that each of the above alternative actions raise for Beatrice. Part a) The first possible course of action is divulging the information known: Phillip’s proclivity towards sexuality in the workplace, and, therefore, his slightly slanted form of Nepotism as well as his excessive expenses and tax fraud. This is, therefore, an official complaint in the light of personal as well as workplace misdemeanour. Part a) could also be seen as asking the fundamental question of the judging the ethicalness of sexuality as well as nepotism in a work environment. Part a) is a question on Ethics. Part b) The second outcome reveals Phillip’s infidelity, and, perhaps, his other misdemeanours to his wife: a personal response to a personal affront. Part b) could be surmised as asking the question of external involvement in personal issues, as well as the partner’s right to know about an infidelity. Part b) is a question on Morality. Part c) The third outcome is different from the other two as it presents a legal, in fact possible criminal accusation against Mr Phillip. Our judgement on Part c) is quite important, as it touches on the issue of whether or not it is recommended or required to report illegalities, legally, ethically and morally. Part c) is a question on Legality, Ethics and Morality. Slide 2 Character Character Diminution Empathy Acquisitive Opportunism Honesty Apathy Moral courage Greed Integrity Moral Cowardace Slide 3 Frame a) b) c) General Morals No No No General Ethics Yes Yes Yes Naturalists Yes No No Utalitarianists Yes No Yes Feminists Yes Yes - Judaic Law No No Yes Australian Law Yes No No