Employment-At-Will Doctrine - Essay Example

For instance, under the doctrine the employer can terminate additional work benefits, reduce employee’s vocational time or even, revise the salary agreements (National Conference of State Legislatures, 2013). Scenario 1: John’s actions damage the company’s image and thus, they are not admissible to ignorance. John did not consider the effects of his actions and thus, it is legally right for the company fire him. According to the employment-at-will doctrine, the employer can just fire the employee without notice and thus, firing John without notifying him will not bring any legal liability on the company.

The ethical theory that best supports my decision is consequentialism. Scenario 2: In this scenario, I would not fire Jim. This is because; the employment-at-will doctrine has an exception referred to as retaliation, which states that if employees engage in activities such as claiming minimum wage or overtime compensation, then the doctrine shall not hold (National Conference of State Legislatures, 2013).Therefore, to limit the liability in this case, I would listen to the claims of the salespersons and changing the commission consider changing the schedules.

Scenario 3: Ellen should be fired. This will not impose any legal liability on the company since; she cannot claim the retaliation exception (National Conference of State Legislatures, 2013). The company could even decide to sue her based on libel and slander. However, to reduce the costs incurred, I would just fire her. My decision in this case is supported by the virtue ethics (Graham, 2004). Ellen has no virtues if she can act so maliciously to get her things done. Scenario 4: I would not fire Bill since there are no legal grounds to fire him.

This is because; he has not committed any conflict of interest by using the phone. As long as using the phone in his business does not jeopardize its use in the company, and then the company cannot terminate his employment. Scenario 5: Installing key logger software in the company computers is a way of protecting the company’s business and it is beneficial to both the employees and the company. Therefore, protesting such an important issue would only imply that the secretaries have hidden motives, which would be jeopardized by the installed software.

I would fire these secretaries since; considering their protest would put company’s data at risk. In addition, the secretaries are not following ethics of principle, which states that principles are just a matter of reasoning and logic. To reduce the liability suffered in this case, I would ensure that I employ other secretaries with immediate effect. Scenario 6: I would fire Joe since it is legally permissible to do so. The employee has committed acts that harm the company’s operations. The company has the right to sue him without notifying him since; it has legal reasons and thus, no liability would arise from dismissal of the employer.

In addition, Joe has no grounds to sue the company since; although his privacy was invaded, it was concerning the company. My decision in this case is supported by ethics of cognitive moral development, which assert that as an individual grows he or she should be able to use critical thinking tactics to solve problems (Graham, 2004). Critically in this case, Joe definitely would not have used a company’