Ethics in the Workplace

Part 1

Choose 4 of the 6 short answer questions, and respond with a few sentences. Each question is worth 5 points.

1. What’s the difference between honesty and fidelity?

2. Why might a libertarian disobey zoning laws?

3. What is a global ethics, and why is it important for the consequentialist?

4. What is the invisible hand argument justifying egoism as preferable to utilitarianism?

5. How can values be organized to guide one’s choice of a career?

6. What is a third party obligation?

Part 2 Choose 2 of the 3 cases, and respond. Each case is worth 40 points. Your score on the essay

section will depend on how well you use ethical theories, and also on how well you use a variety

of different theories. You must place a theory based on the ethics of principles (Chapter 2)

Ethics in the Workplace midterm 2.

at the core of one essay, and a theory based on consequences (Chapter 3) at the core of

the other.

Case 1 Dirty Tricks at Work In his book 21 Dirty Tricks at Work, author Colin Gautrey gives his readers a taste of how intense life

at the office can get. Here is one of his favorite tricks: The exposure trick. Coercing a coworker by

threatening to make public a professional or personal problem. If you’re angling for a raise, and you

know something damaging about your supervisor, you may be tempted by the tactic of exposure.

Imagine you know that your supervisor has a prescription drug habit and it’s getting worse. Her

performance at the office has been imbalanced but not so erratic as to raise suspicions. You plan to

confront her and say you’ll spill the beans unless she gets you a raise.

Question

What ethical justification could you draw up to justify your threat?

Case 2 Two at the Same Time On a real estate discussion board someone with the sign-in name “BriGuy23” asks, “Does anyone on

here find any issue with submitting two offers to buy two different apartments at the same time? My

friend thinks that it’s unfair due to the fact that one of the offers is definitely going to not go through

which means they’re tying up the seller’s time (and money in a way). From a seller’s standpoint I

think I would be annoyed but I really don’t see anything wrong with it from a buyer’s perspective.

Thoughts?”

A response comes from the online-named “middle-aged mom”: “Sellers can negotiate multiple offers

so there is no reason why a buyer could not make multiple offers on different places. Assuming you

are represented by a buyer’s agent, I would use the same agent to make both offers. Make certain that

your contract gives you an out in the unlikely event both are accepted.”

Question What would your advice be? Justify in ethical terms.

Ethics in the Workplace midterm 3.

Case 3 UFC Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC) got off to a crushing start. In one of the earliest matches,

Tank Abbott, a six-footer weighing 280 pounds, faced John Matua, who was two inches taller and

weighed a whopping four hundred pounds. Their combat styles were as different as their sizes. Abbott

called himself a pitfighter. Matua was an expert in more refined techniques: he’d honed the skills of

wrestling and applying pressure holds. His skill—which was also a noble and ancient Hawaiian

tradition—was the martial art called Kuialua.

The evening went poorly for the artist. Abbott nailed him with two roundhouses before applying a

skull-cracking headbutt. The match was only seconds old and Matua was down and so knocked out

that his eyes weren’t even closed, just glazed and staring absently at the ceiling. The rest of his body

was convulsing. The referee charged toward the defenseless fighter, but Abbott was closer and

slammed an elbow down on Matua’s pale face. Abbott tried to stand up and ram another, but the

referee was now close enough to pull him away. As blood spurted everywhere and medics rushed to

save the loser, Abbott stood above Matua and ridiculed him

for being fat.

The tape of Abbott’s brutal skills and pitiless attitude shot through the Internet. He became—

briefly—famous and omnipresent, even getting a guest appearance on the goofy, family-friendly

sitcom Friends.

A US senator also saw the tape but reacted differently. Calling it barbaric and a human form of

cockfighting, he initiated a crusade to get the UFC banned. Media executives were pressured to not

beam the matches onto public TVs, and doctors were drafted to report that UFC fighters (like

professional boxers) would likely suffer long-term brain damage. In the heat of the offensive, even

diehard advocates agreed the sport might be a bit raw, and the UFC’s original motto—“There are no

rules!”—got slightly modified. Headbutting, eye-gouging, and fish-hooking (sticking your finger into

an opponent’s orifice and ripping it open) were banned.

Question

Present an ethical argument against the senator’s actions.