legal research

Employment Discrimination

Employment discrimination is defined as discrimination based on gender identification, sexual orientation, age, physical or mental disability, national origin, religion, gender, and ethnicity (Green 91). Discrimination against workers in the workplace based on who they are, as discussed earlier, is considered unethical. This is what is known as legal workplace harassment. Discrimination against individuals depending on their national, racial, or ethnicity is explicitly prohibited by state and federal legislation in the vast majority of countries around the world (Carroll, and Buchholtz 123). Ethical discrimination may culminate into the breeding of ill feelings at the workplace and this may result in reduced productivity (Carroll, and Buchholtz 123). In an effort to eliminate these ramifications there was the development of workplace ethics which serve as the codes or standards that determine the wrong and right moral behavior in the workplace environment. Ethics involves the wrong, and right behavior and its main focus are on morality and the application of moral principles in the day to day activities of people and organizations (Carroll, and Buchholtz 123; Green 91). Ethics are significant in establishing the long-run viability of an enterprise, the welfare of its employees, and that of its directors and officers. By law, it is required of the employers to ensure that all the workers are treated in a fair manner in the workplace. Positive work ethics should be part and parcel of every company and organization. In this perspective, the shareholders will be directly affected by this moral duty to alter the pay differences amongst the workers. An ethical conflict between the company and the shareholders will, therefore, ensue after the implementation of the pay difference adjustments. In this regard, there should be no issue in raising the pay is the company has maintained its business. In this way, the shareholders will not be affected in any way.

Case Study

The main employment discrimination suspect is whether an ethical issue would arise between the ABC and its shareholders, ABC and its employees or ABC’s employees. This is after the corporation took action in what it termed as a response to moral obligation involving the correction of past discrimination by adjusting the payment differences amongst its employees.

Ethical Conflict Issue

An ethical conflict is likely to erupt between the ABC corporate and its shareholders and also between ABC corporate and its employees. The reasons behind this supposition are that although the ABC company finds it within its moral duty to correct any pay differences amongst its employees, increase in pay will affect the profitability of the company. In other words, more money will be tapped from the usual profits of the company in order to compensate the pay adjustments. There will be no conflict between the employees. In summary, the move by the company to make payment difference adjustment will give rise to conflict between the firm and the shareholders, and between the firm and the employees. The primary genesis of this conflict will be solely in the fact that this move will affect the profits made by the company.

Business Risk Associated with the Issue

Sadgrove (2016), defines business risk as the possibility of losses or inadequate profits due to uncertainties such as increased competition, change in government policy, obsolescence strikes, preferences of consumers, and changes in tastes (64). While doing business, every corporation contains various risk elements. The business risk is classified into five primary categories. Thus, compliance risk, operational risk, financial risk, strategic risk, and other risks (Miller 317). The business risk associated with this case is a financial risk due to the likelihood of inadequate profits, and this could even turn into losses in the future. According to Sadgrove (2016), financial risk is risks that are associated with the financial transactions or financial structure of the particular industry (67).

Recommendation

According to Miller (2011), the firm has an obligation to ensure that it stays in business whatever the case (312). With respect to the shareholders and the employees, it would be in bad light to jeopardize the business by leading it into low profits or even losses due to a moral obligation that is not beneficial to the primary objective of the company. In this regard, it is recommended that the company cease implementing the adjustment as this will create ethical conflict and more saw may affect the operation and induce financial risks which could result in business closure. However, the corporation can move on with the decision only if making adjustments to the payment difference amongst the employees would result in profitability increase, the risk of business closure due to financial constraints will be a thing of the past. In this regard, the ethical conflict will easily be resolved, and the corporation will more successfully stay in business. In this case, the moral obligation decision by the company to correct what it refers to as past discrimination by adjusting the payment differences amid its employees will be in favor of doing the right thing.

Works Cited

Carroll, Archie, and Ann Buchholtz. Business and society: Ethics, sustainability, and stakeholder management. Nelson Education, 2014. Print.

Green, Tristin K. “Discrimination in workplace dynamics: Toward a structural account of disparate treatment theory.” Harv. CR-CLL Rev. 38 (2003): 91.

Miller, Kent D. ”A framework for integrated risk management in international business.” Journal of international business studies 23.2 (2011): 311-331.

Sadgrove, Kit. The complete guide to business risk management. Routledge, 2016. Print.