Workplace Ethics

Assignment 2: Workplace Ethics

Due Week 8 and worth 275 points

Overview This assignment will give you the opportunity analyze the case study, and then write about the ethical

implications and the impact of the events that are described. The case study includes a set of questions that

you should answer. Case Study 8.2: Web Porn at Work (or) 8.5: Union Discrimination. You will be graded on the following criteria: Write a four to six (4-6) page paper in which you:

1. Analyze the questions associated with the case study and discuss them using concepts you learned in this course.

2. Explain your rationale for each of your answers to the case study. 1. Format your assignment according to the following formatting requirements:

a. Typed, double spaced, using Times New Roman font (size 12), with one-inch margins on all sides.

b. Include a cover page containing the title of the assignment, the student’s name, the professor’s name, the course title, and the date. The cover page is not included in the required

page length. c. Cite your textbook as a reference. d. Include a reference page. Citations and references must follow APA format. The reference

page is not included in the required page length. The specific course learning outcomes associated with this assignment are:

• Determine the considerations for and process of ethical business decision making to balance corporate and

social responsibilities and address moral, economic, and legal concerns. • Analyze selected business situations using the predominant ethical theories, such as utilitarian, Kantian, and

virtue ethics to guide ethical business decision making. • Determine the implications and impact of various civil liberty laws in the workplace, such as hiring,

promotion, discipline, discharge, and wage discrimination. • Use technology and information resources to research issues in business ethics. • Write clearly and concisely about business ethics using proper writing mechanics.

Grading for this assignment will be based on answer quality, logic / organization of the paper, and language

and writing skills, using the following rubric.

Page 2 of 3

Points:

275 Assignment 8: Workplace Ethics

Criteria

Unacceptable Below 60% F

Meets

Minimum

Expectations 60-69% D

Fair

70-79% C

Proficient 80-89% B

Exemplary 90-100% A

1. Analyze the questions associated with the case study and discuss them using concepts you learned in this course. Weight: 45%

Did not submit or incompletely analyzed the questions associated the case study and did not submit or incompletely discussed them using concepts you learned in this course.

Insufficiently analyzed the questions associated with the case study and insufficiently discussed them using concepts you learned in this course.

Partially analyzed the questions associated with the case study and partially discussed them using concepts you learned in this course.

Satisfactorily analyzed the questions associated with the case study and satisfactorily discussed them using concepts you learned in this course.

Thoroughly analyzed the questions associated with the case study and thoroughly discussed them using concepts you learned in this course.

2. Explain your rationale for each of your answers to the case study. Weight: 45%

Did not submit or incompletely explained your rationale for each of your answers to the case study.

Insufficiently explained your rationale for each of your answers to the case study.

Partially explained your rationale for each of your answers to the case study.

Satisfactorily explained your rationale for each of your answers to the case study.

Thoroughly explained your rationale for each of your answers to the case study.

4. Clarity, writing mechanics, citations, and formatting requirements Weight: 10%

More than 8 errors present

7-8 errors present 5-6 errors present 3-4 errors present 0-2 errors present

Case study for Assignment 2: Case 8.2: Web Porn at Work Located in the text 1. Is Craig Lindley’s behavior a sign of some psychological problem that Rayburn Unlimited should

help him overcome, perhaps with personal counseling? Or is dismissal called for? Should Al

Smetana fire Craig to send a message to other employees not to misuse company time and

resources? 2. Does Al have just cause for dismissing Craig? Does it matter whether or not Rayburn Unlimited

has an explicit policy regarding computer use? Suppose it has such a policy and Craig violated it.

Does that settle the matter? Would it affect your judgment of the case if Craig had helped draw up

that policy? 3. Does the fact that Craig is a valued member of the company with a long record of service make a

difference? Or that he is a personal friend of Al’s?

I want to be here.

Page 3 of 3

4. Was it right for Al to have asked Craig about his computer usage in the first place? Did he violate

Craig’s privacy or civil liberties? 5. Because Al fired the employee who violated the company’s computer system, would it be

inconsistent or unfair of him to treat Craig any differently? 6. Al Smetana and Rayburn Unlimited are committed to honesty and integrity (the upholding of

which seems to support dismissal) and the intrinsic worth of each individual (which might argue for

more lenient treatment). Are these values in conflict? What would you do if you were Al? Or, Case 8.5: Union Discrimination Located in the text 1. Assuming the Foundation’s description of the case is accurate, was Paul Robertson treated unfairly? Was this a case of discrimination? If Robertson was an “at-will” employee, does he have any legitimate grounds for complaint? 2. Does it make a difference to your assessment of the case whether someone like Robertson knows, when he accepts a job, that he must join the union or that non-union employees will be the first to be laid off? 3. If union employees negotiate a contract with management, part of which specifies that management will not hire non-union employees, does this violate anyone’s rights? Would a libertarian agree that the resulting union shop was perfectly acceptable? 4. Presumably Paul Robertson could have joined the union, but he chose not to. What principle, if any, do you think he was fighting for? Assess the union charge that people like Paul Robertson are “free riders” who want the benefits and wages that unionization has brought but try to avoid paying the dues that make those benefits and wages possible. 5. What do you see as the likely motivations of Bechtel Power and the union? How would they justify their conduct? 6. Why did the Foundation run this ad? Is the ad anti-union propaganda? Do you think the Foundation is sincerely interested in the rights of individual workers? Or is it simply interested in weakening unions vis-à-vis management? 7. Assess union shops from the moral point of view. What conflicting rights, interests, and ideals are at stake? What are the positive and negative consequences of permitting union shops?

Our website has a team of professional writers who can help you write any of your homework. They will write your papers from scratch. We also have a team of editors just to make sure all papers are of HIGH QUALITY & PLAGIARISM FREE. To make an Order you only need to click Ask A Question and we will direct you to our Order Page at WriteDemy. Then fill Our Order Form with all your assignment instructions. Select your deadline and pay for your paper. You will get it few hours before your set deadline.