Question

Employee Rights: Drawing the Line Mutual Insurance Erika, the claims adjuster supervisor, was extremely bothered by what she was seeing on the computer screen on the desk of Jim, a claims adjuster for her company, Mutual Insurance, located in Center City. On the screen was the order page for Boston Celtics (basketball team) merchandise from the team’s website. Jim is known around the office as a big Celtics fan. Erika and most of the employees of Mutual Insurance are passionate fans of the Philadelphia 76ers. At first Jim and some of the others in the office traded good natured barbs with each other about basketball. But increasingly several in the office have come to see Jim as irritating, as he never seems to tire of discussing basketball and mocking the 76ers during break times and lunch. Erika came to see Jim’s computer due to the complaint of one of Jim’s co-workers, Marcus. Marcus is a co-worker of Jim’s and went to Jim’ computer when his crashed while he was assisting a customer. Not wanting to delay the customer, Marcus went to Jim’s office to pull up the customer’s information to complete the service call. Jim was at lunch. It is very unusual for a claims adjuster to use the computer in another claims adjuster’s office, though Marcus didn’t think that Jim would mind. Marcus opened a new window to retrieve the customer’s information, completed the call, then alerted Erika about what he saw on Jim’s computer. Mutual Insurance is medium sized firm that specializes in home and recreational vehicle insurance. The recent recession hit Mutual Insurance pretty hard, though not quite as hard as it hit some of its competitors. Still, all the employees of Mutual Insurance, from executives on down, are still on edge, and the productivity level of the office is on everyone’s mind. Mutual Insurance does have a policy about the personal use of the computer. It is brief and states “all computers are company property and may only be used for company business.” Jim has been employed at Mutual Insurance for about seven months. He successfully passed his three-month probationary period but with only marginally satisfactory evaluations. Erika confronted Jim when he returned from lunch about what was on his computer. She told him that his actions were a violation of company policy. Jim reacted with anger and indignation. He argued that he visited the website during his lunch break, and that it is common knowledge that lots of employees surf the web during breaks whether on computer or phone, and sometimes even during work time in down periods. He also mentioned that it is quite common for employees to send personal emails all times of the day. Erika did not agree that these things were as common as Jim claimed, though she did not doubt that on occasion employees use their computers for personal use and also sometimes conduct personal business on their phones during working hours. She also knows that office productivity is on the top of everyone’s minds, including her superiors. After thinking about things, Erika decided to fire Jim, feeling that it would send a message to the other employees, and that Jim deserved it. © John R. Deckop See Instructions Below Instructions: Please answer the questions below. The length of your Class Case Analysis Form responses (in total) should be approximately one-half to one page, single spaced. 1. Did Erika make the most ethical decision? On what ethical basis(es) do you justify your answer (i.e., profit maximization, utilitarianism, universalism). 2. If you don’t think she made the most ethical decision, what decision would you recommend, and why?

Answer 1

1) In my opinion Erika did not took the most ethical decision by firing Jim right way after catching him using the company property for personal interests. I believe that there could have been a better way to send the message that Erica intended for its employees so that they restrain from using their work desktops for personal use or using their person gadgets during the working hours which might put drastic impact on the productivity. Erica did not made the most ethical decision because her act cannot be justified on the basis of equality and morality. As it is mentioned that there are instances when many other employees might also have used their professional desktops for personal use, targeting Jim is not an equal justice and can be termed biased decision. And since finding of order page open for Boston Celtics (basketball team) website on Jim's desktop has came into notice through sneaking of Marcus into his coworkers computer without his permission , cannot also not be justified in moral terms.

I am basing my decision on the ethical theory of Universalism as I don't consider it apt and justified to make firing of an employee for mistake which might be committed by many till date as a universal law. In other words it is not moral to follow this principle of firing an employee on the basis of not permissable acts which might till date have been committed by others also , so firing Jim without any prior warning (of taking strict action against that person found to be indulged in such act) is not justified on basis of principle of Universalism as it would unethical to fire one employee for the mistake committed by many.

2) I would recommend Erica to first warn Jim of such acts before firing him and then only taking such step if ge continues to commit that mistake. Erica should establish a strict policy clearly mentioning such acts such as using work system for personal use as "not permissable" activities against which strict actions will be taken if not complied with. Erica should also specify the consequences or repercussions to be faced by employees who will be found to perform any such prohibited act that will hamper productivity. After such warning Erica should constantly checking on employees desktops or link their desktops to the company server for checking their history etc. if any employee will still continue to indulge in such actions, then Erica should consider firing option as moral, justified and leading to maximizing good for the company and a lesson for others.