Reference no: EM132145897
USING THE BELOW CAN YOU PLEASE MAKE ME ABSTRACT, SUMMARY, AND CONCLUSION, AND ? CAN U GIVE CITATIONS AND REFERNCE IF POSSIBLE
Performance Evaluation and Corporate Governance
Shaw and Barry agree that we have moral “civil liberties” in the workplace. Writers such as David Ewing believe that too many corporations routinely violate the civil liberties of their employees. Historically, this authoritarianism stems from (a) the rise of professional management and personnel engineering and (b) the common-law doctrine that employees can be discharged without cause (“employment at will”).
Some very successful companies have taken the lead in respecting employees’ rights and human dignity. Corporate profits and efficient management are compatible with a fair workplace environment.
Fairness in personnel matters requires, at least, that policies, standards, and decisions affecting workers be directly job related, based on clear and available criteria, and applied equally.
Misleading job descriptions and inaccurate job specification can injure applicants by denying them information they need to reach informed occupational decisions.
Ordinarily, questions of sex, age, race, national origin, and religion are non-job related and thus should not enter into personnel decisions. Discrimination against the disabled is now expressly forbidden by law. Screening on the basis of language, physical appearance, lifestyle, or illconsidered educational requirements may also be unfair.
A test is valid if it measures precisely what it is designed to determine and reliable when it provides reasonably consistent results. Tests that lack validity or reliability are unfair. Tests may also be unfair if they are culturally biased or if the performance they measure does not relate directly to job performance.
Most moral concerns in interviewing relate to how the interview is conducted. Interviewers should focus on the humanity of the candidate and avoid allowing their personal biases to color their evaluations.
A key issue in promotions is whether job qualification alone should determine who gets promoted. Seniority, or longevity on the job, is not necessarily a measure of either competency or loyalty. The challenge for management is to accommodate its twin responsibilities of promoting on the basis of qualifications and recognizing long-term contributions to the company.
Inbreeding, or promoting exclusively within the organization, presents challenges similar to those presented by seniority. Nepotism—showing favoritism to relatives or close friends—is not always objectionable, but it may overlook managerial responsibilities to the organization and may result in unfair treatment of other employees.
Most moral issues in employee discipline and discharge concern how management carries out these unpleasant tasks. Just cause and due process are necessary for fair treatment. Due process requires that there be procedures for workers to appeal discipline and discharge. To ease the trauma associated with discharge, employers should provide sufficient warning, severance pay, and perhaps displacement counseling.
The factors that bear on the fairness of wages include the law, the prevailing wage in the industry, the community wage level, the nature of the job, the security of the job, the company’s financial capabilities, and the wages it is paying other employees for comparable work. Also important are job performance and the manner in which the wage is established. Fairness requires a legitimate work contract, one arrived at through free negotiation and informed mutual consent.
Unions attempt to protect workers from abuse and give them a voice in matters that affect their lives. Critics charge that forcing workers to join unions infringes on autonomy and the right of association. They allege that union workers receive discriminatory and unlawful favoritism.
A direct strike is justified, argue some moral theorists, when there is just cause and proper authorization and when it is called as a last resort.
Sympathetic strikes involve the cessation of work in support of other workers with a grievance. When the companies involved are different, questions arise concerning possible injury and injustice to innocent employers, consumers, and workers.
Primary boycotts—refusing to patronize companies being struck—seem morally comparable to direct strikes. Secondary boycotts—refusing to patronize companies handling products of struck companies—are morally analogous to sympathetic strikes. In corporate campaigns, unions enlist the cooperation of a company’s creditors to pressure the company to permit unionization or to comply with union demands.