Desjardins5e ppt ch6

CHAPTER SIX: MORAL RIGHTS IN THE WORKPLACE

Copyright © 2014 by McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved.

Introduce the concept of moral rights Distinguish moral rights from legal and contractual rights Explain and examine various meanings of a right to work Examine arguments supporting an employee right to due process Distinguish due process from the legal doctrine of employment at will Examine arguments supporting an employee right to participation Examine arguments supporting an employee right to workplace health

and safety Examine arguments supporting an employee right to privacy

6-2Copyright © 2014 by McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved.

Is it reasonable that an employer tracks your trips via GPS?

Is it reasonable that your employer or potential employer asks for your password to review your Facebook page?

What are your rights?

What is your expectation of privacy?


The Jeff Quon case (police officer)

The Dawnmarie Souza case (ambulance company employee)

The Kevin Colvin case (intern)

The Dan Leone case (stadium worker)


Three senses of employee rights are common in business:- There are legal rights granted on the basis of legal/judicial rulings- There rights based on contractual agreements with employers- There rights that exist as entitlements, resulting from our status as humans


If work is necessary to secure such central primary goods as food, clothing and shelter, a right to work seems a likely candidate for being a moral right.


There are various understandings of the right to work Refers to a right to work without having to join a

union Refers to employees right to a job

Rationale 1: the instrumental value of work, providing means to acquire food and shelter, etc.

Rationale 2: work is the expression of a meaningful life


Critics distinguish between rights and desirable states of affairs Rights imply responsibility on the part of others to

provide what is claimed by that right But does this perspective place an undue burden on

private employers? If so, place the burden upon government to provide

incentives and subsidies


But should government be placed in the position of providing jobs to any citizen who desires one?

Wouldn’t placing government in this position produce too much inefficiency, thus creating economic and political turmoil?


What if government supplied protection for jobs, rather than jobs?

The belief seems to be that governments have a responsibility to encourage private sector employment for all its citizens. As a last resort, the government has a duty to supply jobs.


There is another sense to a right to work: the right, once hired, to hold that job with some degree of security.

This becomes a right to due process.


Historically courts have been loath to recognize obligations other than those explicitly agreed to by the parties concerned (contracts)

An “at will” contract is one that exists only so long as both parties consent or, conversely, can be broken at the discretion of either party


“all may dismiss their employee(s) at will, be they many or few, for good cause, for no cause, or even for cause morally wrong”


Within the United States the legal doctrine of employment at will is limited From the beginning applied only to the private sector Applied only to noncontract employees Employees are protected from firing on the basis of

sex and race, disability, safety complaints, and union support


The courts have recently ruled on Public policy exemption Implied contract exemption Implied covenant of good faith

Yet, the legal burden of proof, of wrongful termination, rests with employees. Absent such proof, employers may fire at will


Due Process (per legem terrae: by the law of the land)

In the workplace due process refers to employees’ right to be protected from the arbitrary use of managerial authority.

Procedures must be established to ensure that dismissal is not arbitrary.


What are the acceptable reasons for dismissal? (just cause)

What is the process that an employer must go through to discharge an employee?

Who is responsible for making these policies known?


The strongest defense of an employee’s right to due process appeals to the fundamental ethical concepts of respect and fairness.

Due Process rights establish the criteria for the justification of dismissal by outlining just cause conditions or by creating procedural safeguards


There are four counterarguments to the right of due process:- Due process involves an illegitimate restriction on the freedom of individuals to establish the conditions of their own work- If employees are free to quit for any reason, then employers should be free to fire employees for any reason


There are four counterarguments to the right of due process:- Due process is an illegitimate restriction on the property rights of business owners- Without fear of dismissal as motivation, workers will likely become inefficient and unproductive


Patricia Werhane responds to the first two arguments by pointing out the significant inequality between employees and employers

Werhane points out, in response to the third argument, that property rights in the workplace do not include employees


With regards to the final argument against due process- If the cost of economic efficiency is the violation of employee rights to respect, autonomy and fairness, then we must conclude that efficiency be sacrificed- Due process does not guarantee an unqualified right to a job- Workers provided with job security and due process can be more productive than those without


Does managerial authority rest upon the consent of employees?

Is workplace democracy justifiable?


John McCall offers five argument to defend the claim that employees have a right to participate in managerial decision making:- The fundamental right to be treated with respect- The impartial promotion of human welfare


John McCall’s five argument continued:- Creating conditions of employee self-respect- Creating conditions to prevent mental and physical harm- Creating an environment that will foster political participation


There are three objectives to McCall’s proposals Employer property rights Managerial expertise Conditions of efficiency


Protecting employee health and safety is one of business’ major ethical responsibilities

This is a complicated issue: Health and safety have instrumental as well as

intrinsic value Acceptable risks need to be defined


Several problems Paternalistic attitudes towards employees Assumption that health and safety are preferences

that can be traded off Assumptions that workplace risks and other types of

risks are equivalent A free market approach is based on the faulty

assumption that markets are perfectly competitive and free


Several problems (continued) Employees seldom possess perfect information

required by markets Individual considerations ignore social justice and

public policy


Occupational Safety and Health Administration (1970) Technological feasibility Economic feasibility

But does this approach go far enough? Does OSHA sacrifice employee health and safety?


From the perspective of OSHA, industries that cannot operate without harming the health and safety of its employees should be closed

From the perspective of OSHA, even if a standard is technologically and economically feasible, it would still be unreasonable and unfair if the benefits did not outweigh the costs


Cost-benefit analysis Cost-effective strategies

Employees have a legitimate ethical claim on mandatory health and safety standards within the workplace.


Two meanings to Privacy Privacy: the right to be let alone within a

personal zone of solitude (Warren & Brandeis, 1890)

Privacy: the right to control information about oneself


Is the definition of Privacy as the right to be let alone too broad?

If so, then the clearest definition of privacy involves the control of personal information

But what if this definition is too broad?


George Brenkert argues that informational privacy involves a relationship between two parties and information about a third

Privacy is violated only when one of the people in the relationship comes to know the third party, while the other party does not


With regards to the control of personal information, a violation of privacy exists only between those having a personal relationship

What are the implications of this control of information for the workplace?


What is the nature of the relationship between employer and employee?

Employee privacy is violated when Employers infringe upon personal decisions irrelevant to the

employment contract When personal information irrelevant to the contract is

collected, stored or used without the informed consent of the employee


Consider two cases from the beginning of the chapter: A police chief read officers’ personal text messages

on their city-issued pagers, even though the officers paid for overage fees related to those text messages

An interviewee was no longer considered for a job after he refused to give the interviewer the password to his Facebook page so that she could review it


Documents

Desjardins5e ppt ch6