Discrimination At the Work Place - Essay Example

DISCRIMINATION AT THE WORKPLACE By Location In today’s society, each sector of the economy has to define its boundaries and how it is supposed to operate. Discrimination at the workplace has been an issue of concern in today’s society. Discrimination occurs when an employer takes adverse action on a prospective employee or employee in terms of gender, age, religion, disability both mental and physical, race, political opinion and marital status. Discrimination is strictly prohibited by various federal laws in different states such as the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) and the Equal Pay Act. Thus, the essay discusses discrimination at the workplace using the Utilitarianism approach, which explores various ethical issues. Ideally, employees are supposed to be protected at all the stages of employment. That is in the recruitment that is how the positions are advertised and how the interviews are conducted. There should also be fair terms and conditions of employment. While at the workplace, they should also be equal opportunities for employment benefits such as promotions, transfers and performance payment. Additionally, they should not be demoted or retrenched unfairly. Each employee should be given equal responsibilities in all the positions in the company. There are different types of discriminations in the workplace. They include direct and indirect discrimination, victimization and harassment (Crosby 2007, p. 56). Direct discrimination occurs when employers make some assumptions that a person with certain characteristic cannot perform a certain task, for instance, failing to employ someone because of their age because you feel that they cannot perform a certain task. Job placement should be on the basis of someone’s qualifications (Gamino& Ritter 2009, p. 42). Understanding that people are different and can perform a task differently enables the employers to encourage each employee to perform a certain task. On the other hand, indirect discrimination occurs when workplace policy is imposed on the employees without considering the ability of all the employees, for instance forcing employees to work for 12 hours without considering those that have other different responsibilities. Consequently, harassment can be portrayed in different ways, for instance, sexual harassment. Sexual harassment can be written, verbal or physical. It also involves behaviours that can make someone feel intimidated, offended and humiliated. On the other hand, victimization is threatening to subject someone to something detrimental because they have demanded their rights or made a complaint about something that is affecting them directly or indirectly. Employees are supposed to be given their chance to present their grievances so as to have a conducive working environment. Every person is supposed to be treated with the respect that is required (Gamino& Ritter 2009, p. 52). Subsequently, there is an increase in cultural diversity in the workplace. However, employees and employers are supposed to learn how they should relate to one another. The organisation will obviously have people from different backgrounds and ethnicities, and they are expected to work together as a group in order to achieve the organisational goals (Smart & Williams 2003, p. 20). The differences among the people in the organisation, lead to conflicts, misunderstanding and discrimination among the members of the organisation. If that happens, it is hard to achieve the organisational goals when the people are disunited. Employers should play a key role in ensuring that all people in the workplace are treated equally and give the respect that they deserve. Additionally, there are various acts and commission that the fight against discrimination in the workplace in today’s society. Some of them include the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that states that it is illegal to discriminate a person based on sex, religion, colour, sex, national origin, age, disability, and race (Holland 2007, p. 12). Sexual harassment is also under the anti-discrimination laws. Thus, employees have a right to complain in case of any unfair treatment at the workplace. Reporting an employer helps in the elimination of the situation and ensures that the employers are ready at all times to protect their employees against any form of discrimination. Moreover, employers must take proper measures to protect their employees against any unwanted behaviour. They should be ready to work and be in the best interest of their employees. If they do not protect their employees, they should be fined, and criminal penalties should be fined against the company. Employers play a major role in creating a good working environment for their employees. They are supposed to be protected against any form of discrimination to give them the morale to perform all the activities in the organisation. When every employee feels that he or she is part of the organisation, they will give their best in the organisation hence, improving its performance thus, increasing the company’s profits (Schultz & Varouxakis 2005, p. 52). According to the Utilitarianism approach by John Stuart, utilitarianism provides a foundation for the improvement of the situation in the workplace. It encourages the employers to take the necessary action to provide equal opportunities for the workers. Employees are supposed to be treated equally regardless of their age, status, gender and religion among others (Tännsjö 2008, p. 14). Making everyone happy is should be the main objective of the employers. The theory also states that if you conduct yourself properly in the workplace, you will achieve the professional happiness, which is required. By making morally correct decisions, one will achieve happiness, and it will increase as time goes by. Respecting the identity and the position of every person in the organisation will lead to general happiness in the organisation. Additionally, when using the Utilitarianism approach, there are no shades of white and black. That means that there are no shades of anything, if something is wrong, its wrong and if it is right it is right. Thus, Utilitarianism approach works toward creating a good environment for the all the workers not certain people. That means that there are no forms of discrimination, which should be witnessed in the working environment. Every person is supposed to be treated equally according to the Utilitarianism approach (Alican 2004, p. 17). The approach aims at creating a positive environment for all the workers. The theory states that the moral actions are the ones that maximize utility. Utility is a situation in which the members experience economic well-being and do not suffer. Additionally, Utilitarianism provides a foundation for an adequate affirmative action to improve the working environment. It aims at improving the situation of the minority in the working place. Instead of focusing on an individual, they focus on the main workplace struggles of the minority in the workplace. It ensures that the real problems are dealt with in order to provide the ‘greatest happiness for the greatest number of people’ (Hinman 2013, p. 12). Focusing on a certain group instead of an individual gives the group the surety that all the challenges they are dealing with will be taken into consideration. In Utilitarianism approach, morality in the organisation is determined through the consequences of one’s actions. Thus, an individual in an organisation should be ready to involve themselves in actions that bring happiness to the rest of the members of the organisation. If people perform all their actions appropriately, they will increase happiness in the organisation leading to better performance in all their actions (Gamino & Ritter 2009, p. 12). Utilitarianism helps in determining the programs, which are moral and beneficial to the organisation. The approach states that an action is regarded as morally right if it leads to happiness. Utilitarianism approach assesses the actions and their outcomes that are the benefits that an action causes to the stakeholders and an individual. It aims at creating the least amount of harm and preventing any great amount of pain that can be caused to an individual (Gregory 2003. P. 12). In addition, the theory adds that every entity interest should be considered equally in making any decision in the organisation. Every person in the organisation is equal and should be given and equal chance to give their ideas. Giving people, the chance to participate in decision-making makes them feel that they are part of the organisation. Shaping the ethical character of an individual takes a long process, thus, the utilitarian process is important in ensuring that people come up with the required ethical character in the organisation (Hinman 2013, p. 24). The utilitarianism approach helps individuals to make the right ethical decisions. The approach can be used to assess actions in terms of possible outcomes and the consequences that emanate from performing a certain action. When using the approach, one makes decisions on the basis of the greatest number of people who will be happy as a result of the outcome. Using the utilitarianism approach, makes people make decisions based on the equivalent happiness that people will benefit from the decision made. Apart from using the utilitarianism approach in making decisions for the common good of the people, it is also used to make decisions that will not harm any person in the organisation. The Utilitarianism approach is used to make decisions, which will result in contentment of the people in the long run. It helps stakeholders to make decisions without the losing their ethical character in the long run. To ensure that ethical standards in an organisation are put into practice, it is important to practice utilitarianism approach(Cohn 2009, p.63). There are two main utilitarianism approaches that are the rule and act utilitarianism approach. They all aim to ensure that individuals work towards achieving the organisational goal and creating a positive working environment. Act utilitarianism; ensure that the most ethical decisions are made for the benefit of the people (Roscigno 2007, P.25). On the other hand, rule utilitarianism is should be put in place because it aims at benefiting most of the people in an organisation. The decisions, which are made aim at ensuring that, people feel like part of the company. It is the fairest method that is used in making decisions in an organisation. Thus, when the decisions are made fairly, there is no any form of discrimination in an organisation. Consequently, utilitarianism approach is the best approach to use in dealing with discrimination because it can be used to evaluate a wide range challenges that people face. Some of the things that can be evaluated using this approach include people’s actions, moral codes, character traits and policies (Hunter 2002, p. 19). It states that after evaluating a situation, we ought to choose the outcome that will produce a result that will be beneficial to the stakeholders and the individuals in an organisation. That is, choosing an action that produces the largest amount of good. That is doing something that produces the best consequences. According to Jeremy Bentham, he answered the question of “what is good?” using a view referred to as hedonism. The hedonism view stated that anything that is good bring out happiness or pleasure. Happiness is an intrinsic action, and it is determined by different situations. It is not all about what actions we perform, but the intentions towards the actions. When performing an action one should ensure that the intentions of the actions are clear and later bring happiness to an individual. Discrimination is unethical action, and its consequences are negative. However, the utilitarianism approach has various limitations that make it difficult to achieve ethical standards in the organisation. One of the limitations is that most people are taught to focus on self-development, and they do not care about the actions that they may take and influence other people around them. Thus, it is hard for most of the people to practice utilitarianism (Weiss 2009, p. 47). Additionally, what may create pleasure to an individual may not create pleasure to someone else. Thus, it is difficult to determine what will make someone happy in a specific condition or situation. In conclusion, utilitarianism approach offers a method for deciding the morally upright situation in any course of action as discussed in the essay above. Thus, individuals should identify the courses of action before they perform any action. Additionally, they should also determine the harms and the benefits that can result from performing a certain action. Afterwards, they should choose an action that benefits the stakeholders in an organisation. Any discrimination will be done away with if the parties involved consider the consequences of their action. Discrimination causes more harm than good in an organisation. Thus, utilitarianism approach is beneficial in determining the ethical concerns in the organisation. Other models that can be used include the common good approach, justice approach, and virtue approach. Bibliography AlicanN. F. 2004,Mills principle of utility: a defense of John Stuart Mills notorious proof. Amsterdam [u.a.], Rodopi. Cohn S. 2009,Race, Gender, And Discrimination At Work. New York, Westview Press. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&jid=63F6&site=ehost-live. Crosby F. J. 2007, Sex discrimination in the workplace. Oxford [u.a.], Blackwell. Gamino L. A. & Ritter R. H. 2009, Ethical practice in grief counseling. New York, Springer Pub. Gregory R. F. 2003, Women and workplace discrimination: overcoming barriers to gender equality. New Brunswick, NJ [u.a.], Rutgers Univ. Press. Hinman L. M. 2013,Ethics: a pluralistic approach to moral theory. Boston, MA, Wadsworth Pub Co. Holland S. 2007, Public health ethics. Cambridge, UK, Polity. Hunter R. C. 2002,Indirect discrimination in the workplace. Annandale, NSW, Federation Press. Roscigno V. J. 2007,The face of discrimination: how race and gender impact work and home lives. Lanham, Md, Rowman& Littlefield. Schultz B.&Varouxakis, G. 2005,Utilitarianism and empire. Lanham, Md. [u.a.], Lexington Books. Smart J. J. C. & Williams B. A. O. 2003, Utilitarianism: for and against. Cambridge, Cambridge Univ. Press. Tännsjö T. 2008, Hedonistic utilitarianism. Edinburgh, Edinburgh Univ. Press. Weiss J. W. 2009, Business ethics: a stakeholders and issues management approach. Australia, South-Western Cengage Learning. Read More