Ethical Theory and Business, 6th Edition
Tom L. Beauchamp & Norman E. Bowie
Chapter Five
Rights and Obligations of
Employers and Employees
© Prentice Hall, 2001
Objectives
٠ After studying this chapter the student should
be able to:
– Examine the advantages and disadvantages of the
employment-at-will doctrine for both the employer
and employee.
– Explain the concept of due process.
– Discern the difference between public sector and
private sector employees.
– Describe the concept of right to privacy.
© Prentice Hall, 2001
2
Objectives
– Discuss the arguments supporting or opposing
employee drug testing.
– Define the term discriminatory genetic screening.
– Discuss the arguments supporting or opposing
genetic screening.
– Describe the ethical dilemmas genetic screening
creates for insurance companies.
– Argue the advantages and disadvantages of
electronic performance monitoring (EPM) for both
the employer and employee.
© Prentice Hall, 2001
3
Objectives
– Stress the importance of personal feedback in
addition to the built-in feedback of the EPM system.
– Describe the argument supporting or opposing
whistle-blowing.
– Contrast both sides of obligation of loyalty as it
relates to whistle-blowing.
© Prentice Hall, 2001
4
Overview
٠ Employment-at-Will
٠ Workplace Drug Testing
٠ Genetics
٠ Electronic Performance Monitoring
٠ Whistle-blowing
© Prentice Hall, 2001
5
© Prentice Hall, 2001
6
Employment-at-Will
٠ “Employment at Will and Due Process”
– Patricia H. Werhane & Tara J. Radin
٠ The authors of this article argue in defense of
due process and against EAW.
٠ Employment-at-Will - The principle that an
employer may hire, fire, demote, or promote
an employee whenever the employer desires,
in the absence of a specific contract or law.
© Prentice Hall, 2001
7
Employment-at-Will
٠ Due process
٠ Public policy exception
٠ Reasons used to justify employment-at-will
– The proprietary rights of employers guarantee
that they may employ or dismiss whomever and
whenever they wish.
– EAW defends employee and employer rights
equally.
© Prentice Hall, 2001
8
Employment-at-Will
– In choosing to take a job, an employee knows he or
she is an at-will employee.
– Legislation and/or regulation of employment
relationships further undermine an already
overregulated economy.
٠ Public/private distinction
– Employees in the private sector of the economy
tend to be regarded as at-will employees.
– Employees in the public sector have guaranteed
rights, including due process, and are protected
from demotion, transfer, or firing without cause.
© Prentice Hall, 2001
9
Richard A. Epstein
٠ “In Defense of the Contract at Will”
٠ Professor of Law, University of Chicago
٠ The author of this article discusses how
employment-at-will works to the mutual benefit
of both parties.
٠ Fairness of contract at will
– Freedom of contract principle
© Prentice Hall, 2001
10
Richard A. Epstein
٠ The utility of contract at will
– Monitoring behavior
– Reputational losses
– Risk diversification and imperfect information
– Administrative costs
٠ Distributional concerns
© Prentice Hall, 2001
11
© Prentice Hall, 2001
12
Workplace Drug Testing
٠ “Drug Testing in Employment”
– Joseph DesJardins & Ronald Duska
٠ The authors of this article argue against drug
testing in that it violates the employee’s or
applicant’s right to privacy.
٠ Right to privacy involves a three-place relation
between a person, some information, and
another person.
© Prentice Hall, 2001
13
Workplace Drug Testing
٠ Job relevance arguments
– Affects on job performance
– Harm to employee, other employees, the employer,
and consumers
٠ Determining which jobs have a potential to
cause harm
– Potential for harm should be clear and present.
– Test employees only when they show a potential to
cause harm.
© Prentice Hall, 2001
14
Workplace Drug Testing
٠ Limitations on drug testing policies
٠ Effectiveness of drug testing considerations
– Does the testing help prevent harm?
– Does the testing provide relevant knowledge?
– Are there more effective methods for preventing
harm?
٠ Six testing possibilities
٠ Testing prospective employees
© Prentice Hall, 2001
15
Michael Cranford
٠ “Drug Testing and the Right to Privacy: Arguing
the Ethics of Workplace Drug Testing”
٠ Completing a Ph.D. in Religion and Social
Ethics, University of Southern California
– Dissertation focus is on ethics and technology
٠ The author of this article argues in favor of
workplace drug testing.
© Prentice Hall, 2001
16
Michael Cranford
٠ Privacy and performance of contract
– Privacy – An individual’s right to be let alone
• A right to control information about themselves
٠ Criteria for obtaining relevant information
– Drug testing is not harmful or intrusive.
– Drug testing is both efficient and specific.
– Drug testing can be conducted in a way that
guarantees a high degree of precision.
© Prentice Hall, 2001
17
Michael Cranford
٠ Questions of justification
٠ Drug testing policy recommendations
– Testing should focus on a specifically targeted
group of employees.
– When testing is indicated, it should not be
announced ahead of time.
– Employees who test positive for drug abuse should
be permitted the opportunity to resolve their
abusive tendencies and return to work without
penalty or stigma.
© Prentice Hall, 2001
18
© Prentice Hall, 2001
19
Joseph Kupfer
٠ “The Ethics of Genetic Screening in the
Workplace”
٠ Professor of Philosophy, Iowa State University
٠ What is genetic screening?
٠ Discriminatory genetic screening – A process
used to exclude workers from jobs based on
their genetic make-up.
© Prentice Hall, 2001
20
Joseph Kupfer
٠ Technical limitations
– Has the gene been located or just simply correlated
with other DNA material?
– Is knowledge of other family members necessary to
determine the presence of the affecting gene?
٠ Causal limitations
– Does the affecting gene require other genes to
produce the disorder?
– Does the gene cause the disorder with inevitability
or just create a vulnerability to the disorder?
© Prentice Hall, 2001
21
Joseph Kupfer
٠ Privacy considerations
– Control of information
– Autonomy
٠ Justice considerations
– Genetic screening indicates merely a
predisposition for a disorder
• Not the inevitability of the onset of the disorder
– Unjust to penalize someone when it is not known
they will contract the disorder
© Prentice Hall, 2001
22
Joseph Kupfer
– Could be used to unjustly “weed out” people for
employment, education, etc.
– Could be used to deny certain types of benefits.
© Prentice Hall, 2001
23
Genetics
٠ “The Genetics Revolution, Economics, Ethics,
and Insurance”
– Patrick L. Brockett & E. Susan Tankersley
٠ Human Genome Project – A 26-year, sixbillion-dollar international science project
designed to completely map the entire genetic
structure of the human species.
© Prentice Hall, 2001
24
Genetics
٠ Ethical dilemmas for insurance companies
٠ Unfair discrimination and insurance
classification
– Purpose of classification
– Distinguishing between high- and low-risk
individuals
– Ethics of insuring by classification
© Prentice Hall, 2001
25
Genetics
٠ Employer health care insurance
– Community rating – The employer is charged an
amount per employee based on the average costs
in the employer’s region.
– Experience rating – The insurer charges different
rates to different employers based upon the
experience of the employees over a rolling
average.
– Self-insurance – The employer takes on the risks
instead of the insurer.
© Prentice Hall, 2001
26
Genetics
٠ Recommendations to address genetic
screening problems in the insurance industry
– Let the insurance industry continue as usual with
the current laws and encourage these companies
to use all available information to decide whether or
not to accept an individual as a possible risk.
– Include passage of legislation which allows for
some type of controlled discrimination, but which
prohibits insurance companies from discrimination
against individuals with specified genetic markers.
© Prentice Hall, 2001
27
Genetics
– National health care in which the government
would insure everyone, and simply allow no
discrimination to occur.
٠ Genetic information for preventive health care
© Prentice Hall, 2001
28
© Prentice Hall, 2001
29
Electronic Performance Monitoring
٠ “Ethical Issues in Electronic Performance
Monitoring (EPM)”
– G. Stoney Alder
– Management Professor, Western Illinois University
٠ The author of this article argues that the
difference between ethical or unethical
electronic monitoring is found in the way the
organization designs and implements the
system.
© Prentice Hall, 2001
30
Electronic Performance Monitoring
٠ Arguments for EPM
– Used to protect consumer and worker safety
– Safeguard company assets
– Increased productivity
– Improved quality and service
– Gives the ability to evaluate effectiveness
– Decreased costs
– Can be a good tool for employee coaching and
training
© Prentice Hall, 2001
31
Electronic Performance Monitoring
٠ Arguments against EPM
– Invasion of privacy
– Increased job stress and health problems
– Dehumanizing
– Decreases the employee’s quality of work-life
٠ Two way communication during the design and
implementation phases is important.
© Prentice Hall, 2001
32
Electronic Performance Monitoring
٠ Rules for ethical monitoring
– Involve those who will be subjected to monitoring in
the system design.
– Inform employees of monitoring practices.
– Supplement electronic feedback with human
interaction.
– Make feedback supportive, non-punitive, and noncoercive.
© Prentice Hall, 2001
33
© Prentice Hall, 2001
34
Ronald Duska
٠ “Whistleblowing and Employee Loyalty”
٠ Professor of Ethics, The American College
٠ The author of this article argues that the
employee does not have an obligation of
loyalty to a company and that whistle-blowing
is permissible, especially when a company is
harming society.
© Prentice Hall, 2001
35
Ronald Duska
٠ When, if ever, is whistle-blowing permissible?
٠ Purpose of whistle-blowing
٠ Employee loyalty to the company v. company
loyalty to the employee
– 3 philosophical positions about loyalty
• Idealists
• Social atomists
• Moderate position
© Prentice Hall, 2001
36
Daryl Koehn
٠ “Whistleblowing and Trust: Some Lessons
from the ADM Scandal”
٠ Cullen Chair of Business Ethics, University of
St. Thomas in Houston
٠ The author of this article focuses on whether
whistle-blowing fosters or destroys personal,
corporate, and public trust.
© Prentice Hall, 2001
37
Daryl Koehn
٠ Whistle-blowing – Persons who sound an
alarm from within the very organization in
which they work, aiming to spotlight neglect or
abuses that threaten the public interest
٠ Effects of whistle-blowing on trust
٠ Reasons why an employee would consider
whistle-blowing
© Prentice Hall, 2001
38
Daryl Koehn
٠ Whistle-blowing should be an option of last
recourse
– Companies and employees need to work together
(two-way communication) building trust to avoid
situations where employees feel whistle-blowing is
the only option to address their concerns.
© Prentice Hall, 2001
39