Jacksonville Shipyards - Research Paper Example

Jacksonville Shipyards Jacksonville Shipyards Although the behavior of Robinson’s male coworkers is morally objectionable, should management attempt to prevent it? Yes, management should attempt to prevent the morally objectionable actions of the male co-workers of Robinson because it is a form of sexual harassment. They should not tolerate such actions because it intrudes on the rights of women. Management should have policies on sexual harassment and these policies should be disseminated to all employees.

Do you accept the claim that the workers have a right to post pictures in the workplace? No, one does not accept the claim that the workers have a right to post nude or pornographic pictures in the workplace because it contributes to an environment of sexual harassment. It may not be offensive to them but it is definitely offensive to the women workers.Is this a personal problem that workers should handle among themselves? One thinks that this not a problem that workers should handle among themselves.

The company should intervene in such problems because it is their responsibility to free their workplace of any form of sexual harassment. The workers alone cannot resolve this issue.Title VII does not mention sexual harassment but merely prohibits sex discrimination. Was the treatment of Lois Robinson a form of sex discrimination? Yes, the treatment of Robinson is a form of sex discrimination because it created an environment which is not conducive to women. Indirectly, the treatment given to Robinson implies that women are not welcome in the shipyard.

Suppose the managers of Jacksonville Shipyards admit that her treatment was morally wrong but deny that they or her male coworkers did anything illegal. Would you agree? One does not agree that the male co-workers of Robinson did nothing illegal. In a court interpretation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, it stated that “employees have the right to work in an environment free from discriminatory intimidation, ridicule and insult” (Clark, 1994). Clearly, what the male co-workers did was a violation of Title VII.

How was Lois Robinson harmed? No one pressured her for sexual favors, she was not denied any advancement or wage increases because of her treatment, and she did not suffer a mental breakdown. Rather, she was offended. Although Robinson was not pressured into giving sexual favors nor was she denied wage increases, nor did she suffer any mental breakdown, she was harmed. As Judge Melton ruled, there was a “visual assault on the sensibilities of female workers” in the shipyard (Lewin, 1991).

Robinson was harmed because of the disrespect she suffered from her male co-workers. The harm was more of psychological and emotional. She was not treated with respect and dignity. Does any employee have a right not to be offended? Yes, one thinks that any employee has a right not to be offended. The workplace should be a place which is fair to all its employees regardless of sex, religion or race. The management of a company must ensure that all employees respect each others’ rights.

ReferencesBoatright, J. (2009). Ethics and the conduct of business (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Clark, S. M. (1994, December). Sexual harassment by customers and other third parties. Retrieved August 1, 2012, from scottclarklaw.com: http://www.scottclarklaw.com/articles/1294.pdfLewin, T. (1991, January 23). Nude pictures are ruled sexual harassment. Retrieved August 1, 2012, from scottclarklaw.com: http://www.scottclarklaw.com/articles/1294.pdf