Ethics

Prior to start the answer of my question, I would like to explain what we mean by morals and ethics. To define ethics would be relatively simple. According to dictionary “ethics” may be defined as a set of principles of right conduct or a system of moral values. But moral is something within our self i. e. something innate. According to Abul ‘Ala Al-Mawdudi “Man has been blessed with an innate sense of morality, which has served to guide him through the age, enabling him to distinguish between right and wrong and good and evil. Now, the problem is that the degree according to which a person thinks a certain act as good or bad varies from person to person.

Therefore to ease us from this problem, God through Quran told us certain moral & ethical norms which we are supposed to follow. This can be explained through certain principles: First of all, we need to see that according to Quran, who is a good Muslim? The answer to this question is given beautifully in Quran when Allah tells us the description of a righteous and religiously committed Muslim. According to this verse, a good Muslim is who, ho obeys all the regulations mentioned in Quran and whose focus in life is love of Allah.

And after that the focus is love of humanity. He is the person who believes on Day of Judgment and therefore is afraid of that. We can be a good person if we do good deeds e. g. giving charity to poor and needy people, looking after the orphans, offer prayers and give zakat. Finally his individual faith must remain firm and unshaken in all circumstances. 1. ATTITUDE TOWARDS PARENTS: After Allah & the Prophet the Quran tells us to give maximum respect to our parents.

In Quran its written at 17 : 23-24 “Your Sustainer has decreed that you worship none but Him, and that you be kind to parents. Whether one or both of them attain old age in your life-time, do not say to them a word of contempt nor repel them, but address them in terms of honor and, out of kindness, lower to them the wing of humility and say: My Sustainer! Bestow on them your mercy, even as they cherished me in childhood. ” From this we can see the amount of respect given to our parents. In Quran we have been told that we should not say a word of contempt to our parents and should always give them respect.

This is because when we were small and were unable to look after our self, they were the one who looked after us. Therefore when its our turn to look after them we should not feel bad rather should try to keep them as happy as we can because one should never forget that if today we are young, tomorrow we will be old and if we won’t look after our parents, our children won’t look after us because our children will learn from us. Thus when we will be kind to our parents, our children would be kind to us. 2. GOODNESS TO NEIGHBOUR AND GUESTS. The importance of neighbors is emphasized a lot in Quran.

Its importance can be well understood by the statement by the prophet that “He is not a believer who eats his fill while his neighbor beside him is hungry”. Islam is so caring about the rights of neighbors that even it doesn’t requires that we should only be good to our neighbors provided that he is a Muslim. Our neighbors can belong to any religion A Muslim must treat his neighbor and guests kindly whether they are Muslims or non-Muslims. 3. ATTITUDE TOWARDS WIVES AND CHILDREN We should never ever forget that Islam was the first religion which gave women equal rights as men.

Before Islam wives were miss treated and new born female babies were killed. But Islam condemned this. In Quran at (2:22) its written that ”And they (the women) have rights similar to those (men have) over them in a just manner”. Islam also gives lot of importance to children especially if they are orphans. We can find numerous times in Quran the importance it gives to children. In Quran at (4:127) its written that “You should deal justly with orphans”. 4. ATTITUDE TOWARDS FELLOW MUSLIMS: Islam is a religion which tells us about brotherhood. It’s a religion which emphasizes a lot on helping each other in difficult times.

According to Islam, all Muslims are brothers and sisters. There is a special term used in Arabic as ”UKHUWWAH ISLAAMIYAH” meaning Islamic brotherhood. In Quran Allah tells us (49:10) “The Believers are but a single Brotherhood: So make peace and reconciliation between your two (contending) brothers; and fear Allah, that ye may receive Mercy. ” Islam tells us to live in peace and harmony. The Prophet (p. b. u. h) said:” A man does not accuse another of being a transgressor nor does he accuse him of being a ”KAAFIR”. But it (the epithet) comes back to him, if his companion is not such. ‘ In Quran (25:63) “And the servants of the Beneficent Allah are they who walk on the earth in humbleness, and when the ignorant address them, they say: Peace. ” 5. ISLAM…… A POLITE & PEACEFUL RELIGION: Throughout Quran we find teachings of Peace, teachings about doing well to others and to talk politely with others.

According to Abul ‘Ala Al-Mawdudi in his work on “The Moral System Of Islam” “People who are polite, sincere, upright, dependable, who are prompt in discharging their obligations to others, who live in peace and allow others to do likewise have always formed the core of any healthy society. And this is what Islam teaches us. Allah in Quran has told us that “And the servants of the beneficent are they who walk on the earth in humility, and when the ignorant address them, they say, PEACE! And they who pass the night prostrating themselves before their lord and standing. ” (25:63&64) 6. PATIENCE IN ISLAM: Over the course of time, Allah sent many Prophets to mankind to guide and instruct them in their daily as well as religious matters. All the Prophets guided us. But among all the Prophets, the Prophet who had most patience was Hazrat Muhammad (p. b. u. h).

Since our Prophet was a symbol of patience, therefore we the Muslims are supposed to show patience in our daily lives as well. Allah through Quran tells us ” O you believe, seek assistance through patience and prayer, surely Allah is with the patient” . In another place in Quran, Allah talking about His blessings and His mercy says “And none are made to receive it but those who are patient and none are made to receive it but those who have a mighty good fortune. ” 7. FORGIVENESS IN ISLAM: Throughout Quran, we have been given instructions for forgiveness. If we forgive our fellow human being, Allah will forgive us.

Allah in Quran tells us that “Praised are they who restrain their anger and pardon the faults of others; and god loves those who do good to others. ” (3;133). If we start forgiving each other there will be many disputes which will end and most of us would be able to live a peaceful life. PART II (a): These days we are living in a strange world, where nations are in conflict with each other, a world where strong dominates the week. If we look around us, we will see that everywhere there is anarchy. It is very unfortunate of us that most of moral & ethical norms which are told to us by our religion are missing from our society.

We have lost patience, we have forgotten the meanings of forgiveness, we are least concerned about the rights of fellow society members, we are unjust in our daily dealings, there is no one to look after the orphans and our minds have transformed into totally profit oriented and self centered minds. We are Muslims. The name of religion which we practice is “ISLAM” meaning “PEACE”, but unfortunately this is one thing which is in a serious lack in our society , rather if I say that this is one thing which is lacked in almost every society of the world, I don’t think that I would be wrong in saying that.

The times through which we are passing are disturbed and distressing and in order to live in a perfect society, we need peace. “PEACE” is basically a very broad term and if I start writing on that then this would require many pages. But while I will talk about Peace, I will concentrate more on a sub category i. e. Relations with other people living in our society. Let’s start from our homes and discuss peace. In past years, families especially in our part of world used to live together in peace and harmony. But with time our traditions and culture has changed. Now people don’t prefer living in joint families.

And if in some circumstances the Parents of married people live with them, mostly they are not respected. Parents are considered as a burden. Although in western societies, the concept of old homes is not a new one but in our society even now, this is not considered good. But there are many parents in our society, who would prefer living in Old homes than with their children because they are not at-all respected in there homes. They are treated like an extra family member and sometimes are even treated worse than the servants. This practice is totally against the very basic teachings of Islam.

Then in order to get a closer look at PEACE in our society we put a glance at peace inside our society i. e. relations with other society members. Many people living in metropolitan cities even don’t know the names of their neighbors while our religion tells us that those people are not true believers who eat by them self while their neighbors sleep hungry. But on the other hand, due to various economic pressures every person wants to get better and better than other. And in this pursuit they many time do certain acts which are not at all good for the society as a whole.

And it is due to these practices that the gap between the rich and poor is widening at a drastic rate. The rich people are becoming richer while the poor people are getting poorer. The jealously among the poor for rich is increasing. If we look around us, we will see many children who don’t even get bread two times a day while on the other hand we have people whose dogs eat better than many poor people. There are people who are sending their children abroad to get higher education by paying hudge amounts while we have children who when learn to walk are sent to workshops to earn money to support their families.

And due to this we find the daily newspapers filled with news of terror, people getting robbed, women are unsafe alone at their home, people prefer not to go outside during nights, and the economic depressions are increasing day by day. Even at times we get to hear news like brother killing his brother just for the sake of money or land. To implement peace properly, we need justice. But if we look around us, we will find that hardly in our society. Justice for any ordinary person is simply out of reach. While on the other hand our religions talks about justice available at the door step of every citizen.

These days’ people buy justice. Our society has been divided unfortunately in different casts. Many people are so cast oriented that according to them Justice and other rights are only for their own people (casts). This all injustice has caused a serious lack of peace and harmony amongst us. Quran always talks about merit but we see that there are many well educated people who are unemployed because of the fact that they don’t have references to get the jobs. They have got degrees, they deserve but the less deserving candidate gets the job because he has got reference of a strong and well known person.

So peace is something missing from our society and when I talk about peace I mean peace in general while concentrating more on relations with other fellows of our society. P. S: While I am writing this I don’t mean that every person living in our society has forgotten the true meanings of Islam but while I talk, I talk about the majority and unfortunately the majority has forgotten the true meanings of Islam. PART II (b): Identify and discuss three solutions (in order of priority) that we, as a society, can work on to overcome this problem.

For each of these three solutions, clearly sketch out a plan that could be used to eradicate the problem. In order to overcome the problem of peace we can act on the following three steps. They are: Minimun wage level and opportunities of jobs for every person. * An efficient system of taxation and its re-allocation: If we look around, we will find out that most of the lack in peace is caused due to the hudge gap between the poor and the rich. What we need is such a system other than the “zakat” that should make sure that the gap between the rich and the poor is reduced.

What our society needs is basically an efficient system of taxation and very well system of its re-allocation. The system should be such that the Government gets enough amount to spend on the over all growth of society as well as maintaining a decent living standard for every person of our society. There are many people in our society who can’t afford to eat even two times in a day. With an efficient system of taxation the Government should make sure that every liable person who is supposed to pay tax, pays tax and can’t do tax stealing.

This can be a progressive tax system in which the rich people pay more while the poor pay less. In this way the hudge gap between the poor and the rich will be reduced and this reduction will cause a reduction in jealously amongst poor for rich. Then with an efficient system of tax re-allocation the Government should make sure that those people who can’t find jobs are given enough amounts on monthly basis for the time they are unemployed that they can at least feed themselves and their children.

Then with the proper re-allocation of tax amount the Government can open Orphan homes in which it should be the responsibility of the government to look after orphans as they are also a part of our society. Normally what the Governments of our society do is that they spend the tax revenue on their own perquisites e. g. increasing the pays of member of parliaments, buying new cars, making foreign trips and sponsoring the Government officials and their families to get the medical treatment from abroad. On such type of expenses the Government pays a hudge amount.

Our society is not a society which can afford this all stuff. What our Governments need is to spend on the reconstruction and growth of our society and economy. Only by doing so we can create a peaceful society. This is because of the fact that when people will see that the Government is doing for their betterment they will feel good for the society as a whole and would try to contribute to the society positively. By doing so, people will feel better about each other. When the economic depression on people will reduce their daily lives will be better and society as a whole will improve.

Most people in our society have adopted an attitude of indifference to the practical problems of life so what we need is that we should realize those people that they are a part of the society and the society is a home for us and we cant adopt the attitude of indifference towards our home. So when we can’t do that for our home then why to adopt that for our society. Therefore we should try to solve the problems that our society faces everyday and should not give impression to Government that whatever it does, we are indifferent.

Rather we should give the impression that whatever the Government does has a direct impact on us. * Proper enforcement of Justice Justice is no doubt a very important foundation of every successful society. Societies have become successful on the basis of a good system of justice and the availability of justice to every citizen without the fact that the person who seeks justice is poor or rich. Islam gives a lot of importance to Justice. Justice is not just restricted to courts. Rather along with courts justice should also be utilized while giving jobs and in Police Stations.

Unfortunately a parasite which is destroying our society is a new trend that job is only given to people with strong references. Due to this practice the deserving people for jobs are not given the jobs while the people who don’t deserve the job are given the jobs. Due to this people who don’t have any references get a feeling that since the society has done injustice with them therefore they need to take revenge from the society and in that pursuit they often walk on the path of crime which is a serious threat to peace.

This fact can be seen from the various newspaper news that when the robbers and thieves have been caught they were very well educated people rather some were even gold-medalist in their respective fields. So if only we can control the justice at the time of giving jobs, we can see a major change in the over all peace of the society. And this can be done by properly enforcing the merit procedure. Then comes “justice in Police Stations”. Unfortunately Police Stations in our society are considered as nightmares for respectable and ordinary people.

In many circumstances Police officials have been caught working with thieves and robbers. In our society, Police is used as a weapon of people with money against the poor people. Usually Police even don’t write the complaints of poor people against people who have got strong positions in our society. In order to correct this, the government needs to start a very strong accountability process in Police department, so that whenever a Police official even thinks of doing some wrong work, he should reject that idea due to the fear of accountability.

Then we need to give Police jobs to well educated people not people with strong references who don’t even deserve the job. Then while giving the job as police officer, we should see the past record of the person that whether the person has any criminal record or not. Then we need to increase the number of Police officials so that police can work more efficiently towards maintaining the peace and law & order in the society. Then another problem which we face while giving justice to people is that we have a very limited amount of courts and judges. The trials even go for generations.

Hence if we increase the number of judges and courts, the process of trial will also increase its speed and the criminals moving freely in our society (on bails of months & months) can be caught. * POVERTY CONTROL AND MINIMUM WAGE: A famous Greek philosopher once said that “poverty is the root of all evils”. It is poverty which makes ordinary poor people to do evil works. Unfortunately the poverty level of our country is horrifying. If we look around us we will find people extremely poor who don’t have any thing to eat, people who want to do work but are unable to do anything because of lack of opportunities.

And there are many people who are working but the wage they get is so low that it is extremely difficult for them to support their family with that wage. It is due to this that we often see news like a man killing his family and himself due to extreme poverty. If we can control the poverty in our society, we will be able to create a lot of peace in our society. Therefore to do that what we need is that Government should establish a minimum wage level for labor class so that they could enjoy at least a normal living standard. This method has been adopted by many developed societies & communities e. . American Society etc. The Labor and the Social Welfare Departments should make sure that the labor class can at least get a decent standard of living. Then the Government can start different poverty control programs whose aim should be to provide the unemployed people with different opportunities so that they could contribute for the society as a whole. In many western societies, the Governments have started Poverty Control Programs which give small loans to people who want to start their own business. With the help of that the people get self employed and are no more burdens on the society.

They with the help of loans establish their businesses and earn sufficient amount to have a decent standard of living. Then the Government can also open different technical institutes from where the students can get some technical education and can work on their own. Therefore if the Government controls the poverty level then the young generation will have no excuse to opt the way of crime in order to survive. And when the young generation will stop opting the way of crime then all in all our society will be one of the most peaceful societies in the world. A society, whose idea has been told to us in Quran.

Legal Ethics Laws, regulations and codes of conduct attempts to define standards of behaviour for lawyers in society. They form an important part of the jurisdiction’s regulatory process. These laws and codes of conduct demand a certain standard in which legal professionals should adhere to in their professional and private lives. It also represents a standard of ethical behaviour defined by legislators and professional bodies. In Singapore, there are a number of primary sources of legal ethics. The following are the main sources of legal ethics: * The Legal Profession Act Subsidiary legislation * Practice directions from the courts * Practice directions form the Law Society * Judicial decisions and opinions on legal ethics Lawyers are bound to these laws and regulation and must adhere to them diligently so as to not straw away from ethical behaviour or to a harsher extent of being banned from practising law in Singapore. In essence, a lawyer’s duty can be categorized into two main groups. They are the lawyers (I) duty to the court and (ii) duty to the client. The tables below explain briefly, the various duties lawyers have to the court and to their clients.

Lawyer’s duty to the Court Duty | Explanation| Truthfulness in Court| – Rule 2(2) A Professional Conduct Rules- Must not mislead the court| Responsibility to Client’s Conduct| – Responsible for client’s conduct and representation of the case| Honoring Undertaking to the Court| – A Lawyer’s word must be his bond| Respect for the Court| – Lawyer’ conduct must be consistent with standing, dignity & authority of the court | Responsibility in Assisting Administrative Justice| – Lawyers are officers of the court| Lawyer’s duty to the Client

Duty | Explanation| Honesty| – Honesty in all dealings with the client| Diligence & Competence| – Lawyer is expected to exercise necessary skills and diligently apply himself to the case| Confidentiality| – Obligation to maintain confidentiality of all communication between him and client| Conflict of Interest| – Lawyer’s conduct must not be influenced by personal or private interests| A lawyer’s challenge is to balance his responsibilities to assist the court with his duty to look after the best interest of his client.

In essence, his duty to the administration of justice is weighed higher than the duty he has to his client. However, it brings about a concern for lawyers when defending their clients. This can be seen in situations in where a lawyer has to exercise his judgement in introducing evidence to the court. If the lawyer does not exercise his judgement in the favour of the court, he is putting his client at a disadvantage. Therefore it is extremely important that a lawyer does adhere to his duty to the court without compromising the position or case of his in any way for it to be advantageous for all parties.

The irony with the youth of today’s generation is that even when they become romantically involved with a certain person or a certain project, they eave the abnormal ability to disengage from that entanglement in an instant. II. Preview Statement: The issue our society is suffering from mainline Ill. Preview Statement: In the modern society, one of the major social constrains to this particular issue has to do with liberty-I am going to discuss this ‘V.

Preview Statement: [Environmental factors are also a constraint in the development of creating loving and decent adults. Body: [About 85% of speaking time. ] l. Our society is suffering from the condition of anomie, which is a situation in which society doles out very little ethical guidance to individuals, and allows a great amount of self-regulation. A. The recognition of should not go unnoticed. It is important we effectively educate our pupils to appreciate spiritual truth, spiritual fruits, beauty, and each other. 1 .

Prevention measures should be taken against individuals from becoming underdeveloped and self-centered in their pursuits of selfish desires. 2. These slackers’ concept of sex is all about lust and not love, marriage and babies. Our education must prevent individuals from becoming meaningless members who sole purpose is to consume with relentless voracity. . Proper values and education are vital, and students should also be surrounded by the right people as role models. B. Woodrow Wilson sums this up perfectly, “Friendship is the only cement that will ever hold the world. B. These days, our members of society view liberty as the privilege of not having any outside form of control to limit them. 1 . Landfills are free to go about as they please and act on their impulses. A. Len counterbalancing their behavior against our society, these individuals find a considerable amount of social permissiveness to commit whatever wrongdoing they wish to rationalize as legitimate. . With society misleading the youth, they are at a disadvantage of understanding the true meaning liberty.

Transition: To truly understand good, we must study the concept of virtue. The great philosopher, Aristotle says, “the true student of politics, too, is thought to have studied virtue above all things, for he wishes to make his fellow citizens good and obedient to the laws” (Aristotle: Ethics). II. As a result, all our choices and decisions should be made with this end result in mind. The way to go about this rule is through making virtue the sole intention in performing our actions. A.

Our society has failed to educate our youth that if our decisions are based on self- interest or emotions such as attitudes such as envy, ill will, or hatred, we are indeed lacking liberty. B. This is because if we do not have the ability to practice self-control by choosing to do what’s good, we are blinded to the degree that we ourselves are lacking in liberty. Transition: [Review the last point and preview the next. Be sure to use complete sentences. ] Ill. Modern parents work long hours and spend less time with their kids, giving them less room to teach them right from wrong, values, and etc,.

A. The parents are more focused on making more and more money in the modern economy. B. The curriculum of education does not place a sufficient amount of importance on artistic activities. C. The system does not spend enough time teaching our children to acquire an ear for a taste in music and poetry. Conclusion: [About 5% of speaking time. ] l. Summary of Main Points: A. The culture of modern society promotes interests aside from going to work and coming back, to simply consume and consume to fill an internally felt psychological emptiness. B.

The issue is multifaceted: how to socialize our children to love one another satisfactorily (which encompasses education); how to correctly assess whether an individual is worth pursuing (which is wisdom and sagacity); and lastly how to choose confidants who will continue to appreciate and care for us even after we have proven to be of no source of personal benefit or entertainment. C. The teaching of love explains that we are not to love the gifts of this world (self- care, companionship, family) for the sake of itself.

Business ethics is one of the most important, yet perhaps most misunderstood, concerns in the world of business today ( Ferell, Fraedrich & Ferell 2002, p.4) . The term ethics has been defined in many ways. Taylor defines ethics as “inquiry into the nature and grounds of the mortality where the term mortality is taken to mean moral judgements, standards and rules of conduct” (Taylor 1975, p.1). It is also known as the study of human conduct on the basis of what is right or wrong.

In this assignment, terms like business ethics, social responsibility and responsibilities of businesses will be defined and discussed. Mainly a work situation, at my present employment which posed an ethical dilemma, will be described. It will also include the options which were available, preferred option, reasons for and against the preferred option. Finally the solution to the situation will be restated by relating it to one of the classical ethical theory.

Business Ethics

Although businesses must make a profit to ensure survival, efforts must be made in order to balance the desire for profit against the needs and desires of society. This concept gives rise to the term called business ethics. In simple words, it can be said that business ethics is the study or the process of principles and standards that guide the expected behaviour in the business world (Ferell, Fraedrich & Ferell 2002, p.6).

Social Responsibility

Often concepts of ethics and social responsibility are confused with each other, although each has a distinct meaning. Social responsibility is the obligations business assumes towards society. Being socially responsible means carrying out business in a way which will maximise the positive effects and minimise the negative effects on the society.

In fact, businesses have few more responsibilities. Economic responsibility requires a business to produce goods and services to meet the needs and wants at a price that can encourage the business and satisfy its obligations to its investors. It emphasises on the fair distribution of resources for both goods and services within society. For example: If Tesco sells a walkers crisp for 30 pence and on the other hand Harrods at Knightsbridge sells the same walkers crisp for 1 pound. Let us suppose Tesco serves 100 and Harrods serves 30 customers which buy crisps. Even though the contribution to the economy in terms of sales revenue by both companies was exact same, Tesco will be considered more economically responsible since it serves a larger part of the society and follows fair distribution (Walser 2003).

Legal responsibility requires a business and its employees to obey local, state and federal law at a minimum. Civil law is concerned with rights and duties of a business and an individual. Criminal law prohibits certain actions and imposes punishment otherwise. Ethical responsibility requires a business to carry out its business activities in a manner which is expected of it by society even though it is not codified in law. It looks at the societal perspective.

Final one is philanthropic responsibility. It requires a business to show its desire to give back to society. This might include donating money to charity organisations, financing community projects, setting up voluntary workshops etc. Nowadays, most businesses often use philanthropic responsibility as a part of their strong business strategy. For example : Mc Donald’s puts a notice on its charity collection box of how much money was donated to charities through that box and also thanks its customers for their contribution ( Walser 2003).

Brief Job Description

I work for Sainsbury’s in Streatham Common. My position is store assistant in the bakery department. My duties involve serving customers at the counter, answering their queries, slicing the bread for them and providing them any kind of assistance they might require.

Situation / Dilemma

We sell bread, doughnuts, cakes, danish, french-sticks, cookies, muffins etc. in the bakery. Most of the products we sell are freshly made within the bakery in our store. But we also get some products as frozen from the suppliers which we then defrost before they are put on the shelves. Two examples of such products which we sell are: muffins and gateau (a big round cake). Muffins are sold as two in a box, and it clearly states “previously frozen” on the product label. Similarly we sell gateau as one in a round packaging but do not tell the customers that it was previously frozen in any way.

Few weeks ago, I dealt with a customer on a saturday while I was doing my shift at work. She was a lady in her late 30’s. It was going to be her son’s birthday on the following Tuesday. She placed an order for a gateau cake to be collected on Tuesday around midday under the impression that it would be made for her as fresh in our bakery on Tuesday morning itself. But the matter of the fact was that it was not going to be made as fresh, we would have had de frosted the frozen cake and sold it to her without telling her that the cake was previously frozen.

Options Available

* I could tell the lady customer the hiding truth that the cake would not be made in the bakery as fresh but instead it would simply be defrosted from frozen state.

* I could just act as if it didn’t matter whether it was made fresh or defrosted. I could take her order and made sure that it was ready for the collection on Tuesday by her.

* I could take the order, process it and then stick a label on the packaging saying “previously frozen”.

Option Taken

I chose option 1 and the lady still placed the order. But she made a point out to my manager that we should state clearly that the cake was previously frozen.

Reasons for Option Taken

I made sure that I was not lying to the customer even indirectly (by not telling her the truth). My conscience was clean. I felt satisfaction of telling the truth. The lady customer also appreciated the fact that I told her the truth and gave a choice to make up her mind whether she wants to go ahead with the order or not.

Reasons against Option Taken

I did not necessarily had to tell her the whole story about the cake being defrosted from frozen because of the fact that it would still have been fresh and moreover she would never had found out the truth anyway. Another reason is that if the Sainsbury’s is not stating that it was previously frozen why should have I bothered? At the end of the day I was not the bakery manager or store manager and it is not my problem either. I also think my manager would have had probably appreciated if I had not told her the truth since it did not make him look very good in front of the customer.

Disproving the Reasons Offered Against the Option Taken

If I did not tell the customer the whole story about the cake being defrosted, it would mean that I was not providing her with information she was entitled to know as a customer. Secondly, just because Sainsbury’s was not acting responsible enough by not stating the cake was previously frozen, I did not have to act in an irresponsible way too but instead I should have rectified the mistake and brought this issue to my manager’s attention. Thirdly, if I was to tell the customer the truth and she was to confront my manager. My manager should have viewed it as positive feedback from the employee as well as customer.

Restating the Solution

I made the right choice by telling customer the true fact about the cake. It was right thing to do according to me because it would have had meant being unfair to her otherwise by hiding the truth even though it was over a simple and small matter but this action most probably and hopefully left a very good impression on the customer to make her another loyal customer to Sainsbury’s due to their honesty and fairness. This argument behind my act relates perfectly with the element of fairness of the virtue of ethics theory of ethics. The theory of virtue of ethics says “The disposition based on a desire to deal with the perceived injustices to others. Fairness often relates to doing the right thing with respect to small matters to cultivate a long-term business relationship” (Maitland 1997, p.97).

Relationship between the ethical dilemma and the theoretical concepts:

A moral virtue represents an acquired disposition that is valued as a part of an individual’s character. A person who has a character trait of being honest will be disposed to tell the truth because it is considered to be right and comfortable. This individual will try to always tell the truth because of its importance in human communication. A virtue is considered praiseworthy because it is an achievement that an individual develops through practice and commitment.

The elements of virtue important to business are trust, self-control, empathy, fairness, and truthfulness. Attributes in contrast to virtue would include lying, cheating, fraud and corruption (Ferell, Fraedrich & Ferell 2002, p.64).

This ethical dilemma can be related to the concept of virtue of ethics. Elements involved were being truthful to the customer about the cake; fairness was shown by telling the customer truth. By telling customer the truth, an element of trust was gained by customer towards me. I empathised by telling customer the truth because that is what I would have had expected of an employee at Sainsbury’s myself.

Conclusion

After hearing about this ethical dilemma, some individuals might say I was being over ethical and what I did was beyond the requirement by my job or the society I live in. Some might even also say that virtue is an unattainable goal and it is not reasonable to be obliged to live up to its standards. But for the believers of ethics and to those who espouse virtue ethics, this argument is meaningless because they believe in the universal reality of the elements of virtue (Ferell, Fraedrich & Ferell 2002, p.64).

Technology has changed people’s life in many different ways but not always for the best or even to improve their life but to do badly in the world. Like they say that a person can change behind closed doors so can peoples ethics. As for example the No Electronic Theft (NET) Act in 1997, how many of us sometimes are will wait for a CD or movie to come out and when we think about going to buy it or even see it the movie n theater, especially if we have a normal size family of people.

There easy could be a hundred dollars for a trip to the movie but when there might be a place where you know they sell black market or even a website online. That where the No Electronic Theft (NET) Act in 1997 comes in place for people make or even reproduce or share copies of copyrighted work. Before this law people would sell and copied software programs, movies, games and even songs for profit gain. It carries a maximum anally of three years and a huge fine of 250,000.

But if it shows that person was doing it for nonprofit gain they could face no chargers or minimum penalties but still if we sit down and realize where the ethics are. The other law that caught my eye during the homework assignment was Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCP), 1991 since right after working in a call center for two years after my high school day with all honestly I didn’t seem to know what was important that our personal honestly ND ethics is more important than the companies and if that company doesn’t have the honest ethics maybe isn’t the right place for someone.

I know that sometimes be get call by telemarketer all day and sometimes we tell them we want to be on the Do Not Call Registry. Because of the problem with telemarketing that they call to early or two late they have rules and it’s where the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCP), 1991 comes in two place where if you telemarketer you want on the Do Not Call List and from there on it take 31 days from the date you asked to be on the list for it in order to be removed and it have a 5 year register .

Most cultures accept the premises that it is wrong to kill another human being. If murder is an absolute truth, cultures, which allow killing, can be persuaded through reason that murder is wrong. For example the Aztec empire when discovered in the 16th century would keep human blood pouring down the steps of their teocallis (Aztec temples). They did this because they believed without constant human sacrifices the cosmos would stop existing. Simple reasoning tells us this is not the case; human sacrifice doesn’t make a difference to the cosmos. However, are we wrong to judge other cultures and people by are own standards?

Are we not being liberal and open minded enough? Well if that is the case I will make up my own rules and kill YOU now! I believe you disagree with that. Absolute truths are there for a reason, to be obeyed. If absolute truths exist, it is logical to assume that there are absolute truths for everyone; otherwise it wouldn’t be an absolute truth. For the person who cries out “I am the god of my own universe… there are no absolutes,” I ask them, “are they ABSOLUTELY sure about that!!! ” and, if you are the “god of your own universe”, then I am the god of mine and I say it is fine for me to kill you.

Surely this is ridiculous? However the wrongness of killing is not primarily explained by the brutalisation of the killer but rather the premature ceasing of life for the individual. What the individual is being deprived of is not a past life but a future existence, a loss of future consciousness. So IF it is wrong to kill other human beings, what IS a human? Biologically humans are made when the egg with 23 chromosomes joins a sperm with 23 chromosomes; this creates a fertilised egg called a zygote, which has 46 chromosomes.

Therefore this is the beginning of life. The egg by itself is not alive and the sperm by itself is not alive. Life can only come into existence when the sperm meets the egg and develops. Therefore I say to Catholics, that using contraception in sex is no more killing a potential baby than a Catholic person masturbating. A potential life is ONLY formed when the egg meets the sperm and growth begins. A sperm or egg on it’s own is not a potential life just the ingredients for life. For a sperm or egg on their own do not contain the complete DNA of a human.

Life is only formed when both the egg and sperm meet (we are all DNA, we are all life). SCIENCE tells us that the instance the egg meets the sperm; a complete set of unique DNA is formed that will last a lifetime. Everyone in the world is unique and science tells us this uniqueness was formed mile-seconds after conception. The unique DNA holds the complete characteristics of the future baby, child, teenager and old man. For the fetus, the baby and the old man are one in the same DNA. Therefore from the moment of conception the complete characteristic’s of what we will be is established.

Defendants of abortion disagree with the premises that the fetus is a human being from the moment of conception and instead believe as Thomas states “only a bit of tissue that will become a person at birth. ” Therefore this statement suggests a person’s rights only begins after birth. This statement therefore is saying a fetus in its first weeks has the same rights as a fetus hours before birth. However how many people would accept to aborting a baby just before birth? Though according to the pro-abortionist the fetus is only a bit of tissue, until birth when it becomes a person with rights.

However to determine the moral status of abortion you must distinguish what attributes are needed to be a member of the moral community, what does it means to be a person with rights? Mary Anne Warren defines a human being as “a full-fledged member of the moral community that is also a human being. ” These are moral entities capable of respecting and inventing moral rights. To be morally human Warren identifies certain traits that must be present such as sentience, emotionality, reason and self-awareness. Therefore you can spot species, which deserve moral respect from these traits.

She uses an example of an alien arriving and using these qualities to determine whether it deserves moral respect. If these behaviours cannot be identified in certain species then they cannot be given moral respect and be regarded as “a person. ” She distinguishes this “moral sense” from the “genetic sense” of a human. Warren believes that for abortion to be wrong you must prove whatever is genetically human to also be morally human. She believes fetus’s can only be genetically human and therefore do not fall under the category of a human, thus forfeiting human moral rights.

Despite Warren’s observation that a seven-month-old fetus can feel pain and respond to external stimuli, she reasons that this still does not put the fetus under the category of personhood. Therefore she concludes a seven month fetus is no more a person than none human animals. However if only those people who have psychological attributes of a person can enter into moral contracts with others, what then is our duty not to inflict pain and suffering on animals or to another level small babies.

Suffering however is a misfortune when experienced by us, so we should therefore uphold and shun away from participating in the suffering of animals or other humans. For if we are going to kill animals or infants we will do so in a way, which brings about the least amount of suffering. Regarding animals Kant has argued that treating animals with care is important for the sole reason that in doing so mans heart won’t harden in their treatment of humans. However Feinburg shows treating infants with care is important because they need to be trained in moral behaviour so by treating them with care benefits us.

However this argument shows, just as we can treat with care the infants we intend to keep we can kill the infants we intend to discard. In the same way we can treat with care the fetus’s we intend to keep but discard the fetus’s we don’t want. Warren argues in some situations it can be practical anyway to abort babies or even young infants. This is in cases when the current population is unable to sustain new life. It seems barbaric that creatures, which possess developed social structures and morals could result to such behaviour.

From a utilitarian perspective however in some circumstances this outcome could be argued the most beneficial to the majority of society. However in normal circumstances it seems absurd to pick and choose infants who can live or die which could be argued have the same moral standing as fetus’s or animals. Bearing in mind this Don marquis believes a different approach is needed, this approach regards the question of whether the fetus deserves the right to life. A premature death results in the loss of the future goods of consciousness therefore killing is wrong because it deprives a person of a “future like ours.

Fetus’s will became human and develop and grow into sentient creatures therefore having dispositions like ours, so does this mean they deserve the same chance as us? The misfortune of contracting an incurable disease is that the disease denies that person a future like ours that they would otherwise have and which they would no doubt rather have. The will to live is strong for life is sweet, and because we recognise this, doctors will do their up most to preserve someone’s life who is unconscious or suicidal because they don’t want to deny the person the chance to have a future like ours.

In the same way a fetus or infant whether unconscious or not deserves a chance to experience future consciousness for no one would like their future conscious or the chance to have a future consciousness prematurely eliminated. However the future like ours argument does pose some problems. The degrees of wrongness in killing do seem to be in proportion with the victim’s age. For a 5-year-old child has more potential future than an 80-year-old man, leading from this it would seem more right to deny an 80 year old man a future like ours than a 5 year old child.

However stating as Marquis puts it, “adopting the legal equality of murder”, can put down this criticism. Some have argued that contraception is denying a potential FLO when conception is possible. However since at the time of conception there is no individual to be harmed, there is no entity with a FLO, there is just millions of possible potential FLO but nothing with an actual one. For in the case of contraception nothing has been harmed therefore their was no potential suffering.

Despite pro-abortionists disagreeing to “drawing a line” to where a fetus becomes a human with rights, many agree that the fetus has become a person with characteristics well before birth. Are they drawing a line here? Do you draw the line at the birth of the child which when born still does not necessarily posses the qualities of personhood. Does this mean you can treat small babies like animal’s which its characteristics are more similar to, however as I mentioned earlier, causing suffering is wrong. Surely you should treat the baby like the species it is from with the set of morals that it will grow into.

All species under the banner of the same DNA should be treated with the same moral respect even if they haven’t developed the capacity or will never – such as disabled people. These people have observed and agreed that a young fetus does have human characteristics such as internal organs, limbs and brain activity. However the developments of this young fetus have all come from the DNA initiated moments after conception, therefore the moment of conception is the beginning of the person, which then will grow.

However pro-abortionists still argue that at conception the fetus is just a clump of cells and no more a person than an acorn is an oak tree and no more valuable than a lifeless rock. Thomson suggests that even if life begins at conception it does not necessarily follow that abortion is morally impermissible. He suggests the possibility that a women’s right to decide is stronger than a fetus’s right to life and that to deny a women the choice of abortion is to deny her the right to control her own body. This is outlined by the use of an analogy of a famous violinist.

I would like to suggest that this is not an acceptable argument in the debate about abortion because there is a different duty in sustaining life and looking after new life, which originates in you. The analogy states that you have been kidnapped and connected to a violinist in order to keep him alive and only you have the qualities for this purpose, to unplug yourself from him would result in the violinists’ death. This analogy is suggesting that all human beings have a right to life and dispite unwillingly being connected to the violinist, disconnecting yourself would not be giving the violinist a right to life.

To stay consistent the anti-abortionist would have to stay in bed with the violinist however long that may be because all humans have a right to life. This analogy is trying to suggest that someone’s right to decide what they do to their body is greater than someone’s right to life? I’m sure you would be outraged if you were unwillingly and knowingly put in this situation. Although if you were feeling generous you might decide to save the violinist by staying connected, if 1 hour of being connected to him would save his life.

However that is the individual personal decision to make. A law, which required you to stay in bed with the violinist, would be an unjust law. If the right to decide is greater then the right to life, Thomson is saying, then the anti-abortionists premise of life beginning at conception is irrelevant. This analogy is trying to distinguish whether people who oppose abortion will make an acceptation, if the conception was due to rape and therefore as the violinist analogy puts forward, the participant was unwilling. Therefore do some people have a less of a right to life than others?

Surely there is no distinction between the circumstance that life is created, life is life and people have the same feelings however conception takes place. A test tube baby is still an original, unique life. Rape is wrong but is it right to punish the innocent party (the baby). If anyone is going to be killed as a result of rape, surely that should be the rapist?! A pro-abortionist could argue that the mother is the innocent party and therefore is being punished through the conception. Again the question comes down to the premises of whether a right to life is greater than the right to choose.

However just because a fetus is down to rape doesn’t make that new life any less important – it is still a life. However I would like to suggest that there is a difference in sustaining life and promoting new life. There is a difference of responsibility in life as a result of a pregnant women (regarding the fetus. For all of us need our organs to function and we don’t have a responsibility to sacrifice ourselves and are organs or freedom to sustain life randomly because we are life ourselves and have the same right to sustain our life and not give are bodies to the goodness of life for everyone.

If this statement is wrong I challenge everyone to go down to the hospital tomorrow and willingly sacrifice themselves for the good of sustaining life (or violinists! ). However new life is the result of conception, this conception is not sustaining life but rather giving new life, this is completely different. The violinist analogy poses the question that there is a ladder of people who have more right to life than others. A human chose that the violinist’s life was more important to sustain than the person who was attached to him, what about the violinists responsibility to promote life.

If someone is being forced to keep you alive, life isn’t being promoted but the opposite is occurring. The violinist analogy automatically assumes that one person is more valuable to sustain than another. Therefore this leads us to the question; can we use a person who is less valuable to society in order to sustain the life of someone who brings more value to society, such as use murderers and rapists in this way and their organs? The question this raises is, what human has the right to decide who lives or dies or how you use your body.

In the violinist analogy a human decided that someone’s life was not as valuable as the violinist’s. The anti-abortionist can argue that this example is not acceptable to the debate. There is a difference in sacrificing yourself to SUSTAIN existing life and sacrificing yourself to KEEP new life. Existing life was their before you decided or were forced to sustain it (e. g. sustaining the violinist) but new life originates in the person and wasn’t around before. The person who was attached to the violinist was attached to sustain the violinist’s life NOT to keep a new unique life.

A new life comes into existence though conception at birth. The person attached to the violinist was sustaining his life but the violinist did not originate in the person that was attached to him, it was a different situation and not properly relevant to the abortion debate. The issue is complicated if the mothers life is in danger as a result of the pregnancy. If we conclude that all have a right to life, can we add to the mothers write to life the right to decide? Theirs no doubt the mother unlike the fetus has the opportunity to decide and if she is acting in a way as to save herself, she is acting in self-defence.

Thomson here uses the house analogy here to illustrating that a women has a write to defend herself from the threat of an innocent baby in the example a women and child are both in a house, the child is growing and will eventually unknowingly crush the women. This illustration is designed to provoke us. However is it the women’s body to decide? For the women is a carrier and the baby is a separate life. Thomson does say that it is indecent for seven-month pregnant women to have an abortion so she can go on a trip to Europe. People instead should get their priorities in order.

Thomson believes each situation should be judged on its own merits. For an example she believes it acceptable for a 14-year-old pregnant rape victim to have an abortion to relieve the trauma but the situation changes if a pregnant women changes her mind or became pregnant because of no contraception. In other words a person behaves in a way that could have been avoided. However as more and more people start using abortion as a form of contraception we should ask the question, what did the sexual revolution of the sixties bring us?

It brought us, sexual diseases, single parents, less stability, aids, increased abortions – “free love” is starting to look more like “free death”. The issue of abortion comes down to people’s own moral belief. Human logic can dictate, which I have highlighted that abortion could be justified in extreme circumstances although should not be used constantly as a form of contraception. However the biblical view states very clearly that abortion is a sin. From the moment of conception the DNA cells have divided into areas and the characteristics of that life has been established. In the eyes of God therefore it has been given the breath of life.

For an owner whose employee’s performance has been superb or even exemplary, it would be very difficult task to tell them face to face that they have been laid off. However, if a company faces liquidity crunch or financial crisis, the most preferred remedy is to resort to lay off tactics. [Mabert et al, 1997]. According to John Rutledge , a good ethical behavior in a business deal is to allow the opponent in a transaction to go away with his self-esteem, humor, and bearing undamaged and with a pretty good deal, which is the right manner to close a business deal.

According to J. C Penny, an ethical behavior is doing a thing to others as one would do to himself.

According to Immanuel Kant, an ethical act consists of the following:

• It should honor the inherent worth and dignity of those associated or involved;
• Special treatments to parties involved should be avoided and should have harmonized application universally.
• It should be inconformity with the other universal moral standards. Management should be more careful while making downsizing plans for prudent economic reforms.

There should not be any withholding of information and it should be let known to all concerned to avoid to take any crucial decisions like career, family or financial commitments. Utilitarianism is just opposite to universalism which gauges the justification of an action by its consequences. John Rawls’s ethical perception of justice connotes that individual have a commitment to select their own rights in a style that allows others to enjoy their own. [MaCann, 1997].

In a conflict resolution, an employer or an employee union may adopt the following tactics to achieve their aim. [Reitz et al, 1998].

• False statements or lies: This refers to testimonial made in opposition to the negotiator’s comprehension or conviction about incredible material to the negotiation. When an opponent deprives the other party of the truth through lies, the victim of those lies may be forced to take unworthy decisions. One party may resort to lying when he come to know the other party is lying.

In negotiation with the employee’s union, lack of trusts and cynicism involves considerable costs and it may require more enactment of laws, sanctions and surveillance and none of which may not add any value to transaction and to be in place before signing agreements. Lying in negotiations is not advocated by any of the above ethical models. Sometimes, lying is permitted only when it is proved that if it could prevent a great harm to another. For instance, a company should not resort to layoff tactics mainly to bolster its stock market price.

In majority cases, stock price of a company shoots up on the day when the layoff decision is formally declared. [Reitz et al, 1998].

• Deception: Misleading statements to make other party to believe that deal is worthwhile to complete. Employee’s union may resort to false promises or excessive initial demands, empty threats, statements of fact, demanding things not related and lackadaisical statement of fact. Deception is nothing but misleading or deceiving others.

It allows the cheater to make profits at the costs of other’s innocence thereby infringing the principles of utilitarianism. It does not fall under distributive justice as it limits the deceived person’s preferences. Thus, deception will not fit into all four tests of ethical behavior. [Reitz et al, 1998].

• Puffery: It refers to overstating the value of the subject matter in the negotiation. It is exaggerating something. It is simply a euphemism for lying. Exaggerations are those designed to cheat and gain advantages at someone’s expense.

For instance, layoff announcement may trigger stock price up. Investors and financial analysts who always welcome the layoff news by bidding higher price of the company’s stock may be reacting to company’s puffery over projected positive financial results in the near future .

• Strengthening one’s situation: Statements or actions planned to enhance the delegate’s position without openly dampening the opponent’s position. This denotes effort, ability and intelligence by one party during negotiation and does not include any devious means like deception, lying or exaggeration.

One can be more vigilant to strengthen his stand in situations like ‘survival is the fittest ‘scenario especially when facing liquidity crunch or facing economic down trend.

• Nonexposure- This refers to the strategy of keeping aside the key information without exposing to opponent. Nondisclosure of key information to the opponent would be unethical. Withholding some vital or key information like a defect in a product or service, laying off workers mainly to enhance the profits are some examples.
• Exploitation of information – Employing information offered by the opponent to destabilize him by sharing the same with others. One is not authorized to do direct damage to an opponent. On the other hand, if the harm has been done by the other already, one may use such information for his advantage. One is ethically considered as doing a right act if he uses a police report of a burglary which demonstrates that the other party has a larger ability or need to pay for an item over which one is deliberating.
• Maximization- Not considering the opponents payoffs and emphasizing the negotiator’s payoff vigorously
• Distraction- It refers to statements or acts to attract the opponent by overlooking alternatives or information that might be advantageous to him.
• Weakening of position of other party: Weakening of opponent’s status either by economically or psychologically by lowering the opponent’s self-respect, through embarrassment or guilt and by indirect attacks like shutting off’s the opponent’s options.

Being an owner – CEO of a small job shop machine tool company and having 35 employees, I fed up with employee’s union stand in opposing my decision to announce layoff to save the company. The union does not understand that by laying off about 15 employees will not only save the company from bankruptcy but also save the jobs of remaining 20 employees. Union has argued that employees have a fundamental right to life and laying off randomly is morally wrong. Further, employee’s union advocates have argued that workers have a right to their jobs and hence, the management has a duty not to lay off them.

Union is not understanding the fact the company is in real danger of going out of business and minimizing the labor costs through lay offs is the only available alternative as the employees have not accepted to downsize their pay by 50 percent. Further, union has not understood that layoff is a preventive measure. Company’s competitive scenario is deteriorating due to escalation in labor costs and hence unless labor cost is brought to the minimum, the company may ends up in life or death position. (Gilbert, 2000).

In this case, employees are doing very satisfying job and have actually contributed to the company’s success but some of them have to sacrifice to save the sinking company. Utilitarian concept may condone the decision to layoffs but we should realize that layoff is necessary to save the company and is not pursued to enhance its performance. Surviving through price reduction may hamper the financial situation of the company unless it is followed by cost reduction like labor cost or material cost. Surviving through product enhancement or through introduction of new products may take a long gestation period . Also read utilitarianism and business ethics essay

Likewise, increasing the marketing efforts may not be productive as it involves costs. However, labor cost can be reduced immediately and many companies have resorted to layoffs in the past. If the situation continues, the company has no other way but to file chapter 11 bankruptcy and reduce its workforce by declaring layoffs. In utilitarian concept, filing of bankruptcy petition would usher unhappiness for many stakeholders like creditors, shareholders and suppliers than would occur with layoffs alone.

Union’s argument as layoff may increase the workload of remaining workers and concern of uncertainty of their future with the company is totally unacceptable that in a scenario where layoffs can presently prevent a crisis later and hence, selecting layoff strategy can be the best choice. Union is vehemently pointing out that in case of layoff , reverse seniority should be applicable with new entrants should be laid off first rather than counting on performance of employees and not realizing that senior employees cost will be always high. (Gilbert, 2000).

In USA, whether layoffs can be declared at will differs from state to state. Further, federal law proscribes termination of employees on the ground of gender, age and disability. It is to be noted that with some exception, employees in U. S. do not have legal rights to retain their job as long as they are doing satisfactory performance of their job. It is to be remembered that under rights and duties method, it is not morally prevented from declaring layoffs. In USA, employees who lost their jobs due to layoff are having the right to sue their former employer later and however, they cannot reverse the layoff decision. (Hallbert & Ingulli, 1997).

As owner of the business, I have not practiced any puffery, exaggeration and have given full facts and figures to the employees and their union. Still if they decide not to cooperate with me, I have no other way but to announce legally layoff within the parameters of present laws to avoid filing of chapter 11 bankruptcy petition later.

References

1. Gilbert, Joseph T. (March 22, 2000). Sorrow and Guilt: An Ethical Analysis of Layoffs. SAM Advanced Management Journal. http://www. allbusiness. com/management/543491-1. html.
2. Hallbert, T. , Ingulli E. (1997). Law and ethics in business environments, Minneapolis/St. Paul: West Publishing.
3. Mabert, V and Schemnner, R (July-August, 1997). Assessing the roller coaster of down-sizing, Business Horizons, 49(4), p. 45-53.
4. MaCann, D. (March, 1997). Catholic social teaching in an era of downsizing: A resource for business ethics, Business Ethics Quarterly, 7(2), p. 57-70.
5. Reitz, H. Joseph, Wall Jr. , James A and Love, Mary Sue. (May /Jun 98). Ethics in negotiation: Oil and water or good lubrication? Business Horizons, Vol 41(3), p 5-1