HR Ethics Scenarios Worksheet

1.The HR Director is having lunch outside the office. She hears a competitor talking about a significant change in their business that could affect the performance of her own firm.

What is HR’s ethical duty?

Because the information was exposed in a public setting, coming across the information was not obtained unlawfully. The information was accidentally stumbled upon during other activities. Ethically, every employee should operate to the benefit of the company. This means that it is expected of the HR to observe all the ethical requirements. However, this information is significant and important to the wellbeing of the firm. In her own capacity, the HR Director, should treat the information as intelligence (Ferrell, &Fraedrich, 2015). Ethically, she should seek good ways to relay the same information to the relevant departments of the firm which will act appropriately to neutralize or counter the competition. One of the most important aspects of a company is related to competitive advantage. Any information important to the firm that might improve or reduce performance should be looked into and addressed with speed (Wilton, 2016). HR should review the department of the firm that could be affected by the significant change planned by the competing firm. Secondly, HR should look into the ability of the human resource in that department to help the company counter the move by the competing firm. Third, it is important that HR conduct a review of the personnel and take appropriate action so as to ensure that the firm is well at par or even ahead of the competitors despite enacting their significant change (Ferrell, &Fraedrich, 2015). If the changes entail relieving some employees of their duty or adding more workforce to the team, it is the human resource directors’ right to ensure that the firm’s interests are achieved without affecting the rights as well as the well-being of the existing employees in the firm (Wilton, 2016). Therefore, in summary, the HR’s ethical duty is to ensure that the information gathered is used positively to prevent the firm from facing stiff competition that might threaten its continuity.

Explain why this may fall under corporate responsibility and insider trading.

On the other hand, the issue of insider trading is also a problem. Insider trading entails illegally acquiring information which could be beneficial to one individual in taking advantage of the firm. In this case, insider trading is possible.The definition of insider in one jurisdiction can be broad, and may cover not only insiders themselves but also any persons related to them, such as brokers, associates and even family members. A person who becomes aware of non-public information and trades on that basis may be guilty.There are three main factors, which can be identified. Depending on jurisdictions, there may be either civil or criminal penalties, or both. Scope, how many people were affected by the wrongdoing? Gain, how much did the insider make from the transaction, whether directly or as a tipster? Where there is a tipster and a tippee, how much did the tippee make from the transaction? Evidence, anyone charged is innocent until proven guilty. The burden of proof falls on the prosecution. If no one “flips,” or if there isn’t a smoking gun, the prosecution has a harder time proving guilt. This may result in prosecution moving away from criminal charges, and instead choosing to pursue civil charges.However, this is only applicable in the event that the HR director is acting against the interests of her firm (Wilton, 2016). For instance, when the HR decides to use the information to her own benefit and ignore the interests of the firm, then the HR will have acted unethically and thus committed insider trading which is illegal in most jurisdictions. On the other side, the HR can act ethically and use the information for the good of the company. Therefore, as an HR director who is morally upright and ethically dependable, it is not expected of her to use this information to demean the position of the firm.The punishment for insider trading depends on a few different factors.

2.The head of HR refers a family member to a department head for consideration in an “unposted” job.

This scenario is a case of nepotism. As the head of department, to whom the candidate has been referred, I would act in accordance with the organizational regulations, policies, and code of conduct. The role of the human resource department are to ensure that the most suitable and qualified employees for the firm are employed and that all the ethical procedures and thresholds for recruitment are met. It is, therefore, important that the human resource manager should observe professional responsibility, professional development, ethical leadership, fairness and justice, and eliminate a conflict of interest in the use of information. As the human resource director, I would act ethically and responsibly according to the human resource sector code of ethics (Wilton, 2016). The human resources manager in this case would be putting me in a difficult position. He would be exposing me to ethical and legal risks as a head of department and member of the company’s management team. However, organizational interests would take precedent in my decision and action. Usually, an organization’s code of conduct and ethics will prohibit nepotism, favoritism, and potentially corrupt practices (Ferrell, &Fraedrich, 2015). Based on this rationale, I would not consider the referred the HR’s relative for the unadvertised job if not for grounds of merit and following the appropriate hiring procedure. I would advise the candidate to make application to be considered for posted or un-posted positions. I would also put this on record by bringing it up with the professionalism and ethics committee, which in most cases is mandated to handle issues of the same nature. My actions as described above would protect the organization and I from the ethical and legal risks occasioned by the scenario. As it is quite evident that there is an aspect of corruption in the recruitment of a favored candidate for an unposted position. As an HR director, my action, in this case, would entail ensuring that the person referred for an unposted job is not awarded the position without proper vetting (Ferrell, &Fraedrich, 2015). Also, I would ensure that the position is first posted and all people apply. This is because fairness and justice should be accorded to all who wish to be employed in a firm. The basis of elimination is usually through merit. As such, fairness and justice demands that the organization through the HR department realizes the intrinsic values of its employees. Secondly, it is essential that the HR department treats people with dignity as well as the respect that they deserve. Also, opportunities should be given on an equal platform such that no one is favored by the process or the system (Ferrell, &Fraedrich, 2015).

Explain this in the context of the corporate responsibility of conflict of interest.

A conflict of interest arises where a person, acting in his or her official capacity, is hindered from making an objective decision because of the existence of vested personal interests in a situation (Ferrell, &Fraedrich, 2015). Conflict of interests arises when a person in a position of decision-making stands to realize personal gains from making a decision. This action by the head of HR is in complete contravention of the laws governing conflict of interest as well as fairness and justice in providing employment opportunities to employees (Ferrell, &Fraedrich, 2015). Organizational codes of conduct, professionalism, and ethics, mandate or require affected individuals to declare any financial or otherwise conflict of interest, and may or may not require such an individual to recuse himself or herself from the situation depending on the nature of the circumstances. In the provided scenario, the human resources manager would not be in a position to make an impartial and objective hiring decision because the individual under consideration is a relative. Further, as the head of department, I have a personal relationship with the human resources manager and would not be in a position to make an impartial hiring decision, without running the risk of engaging in favoritism.To solve this issue, the firm’s guide in relation to conflict of interest should be consulted so as to ensure that the referred candidate is subjected to the official recruitment process so that he or she is only accepted on the basis of merit. For the smooth continuity of the firm, it is also important that the head of HR, as well as other employees within the firm, refrain from bias as well as favoritism of any kind and form.

The HR can be rightly accused of bias as well as corruption on the basis of conflict of interest for recommending his family member for a position which has not been posted and is therefore not subject to thorough and fair vetting process of recruitment. As an HR director, my corporate responsibility entails ensuring that the head of HR follows the recruitment laws as established and set by the firm (Wilton, 2016). It is also upon me as the HR director to ensure that the job is posted publicly to avoid instances of corruption. The head of HR is, in this case, acting unethically on insider information for his personal benefit or the benefit of his family (Ferrell, &Fraedrich, 2015). It is quite illegal for this to happen and therefore the head of HR is out of line and should be corrected or warned of the actions that he has taken regarding the vacant position on the basis of conflict of interest (Wilton, 2016).

3.You just started your new job as the Director of HR for a government contractor. After being there for a few weeks, you notice that employees are being periodically drug tested. However, the tests don’t appear random and tend to focus on one specific group.

Why is it important to investigate and resolve the issue immediately?

As a government contractor, you are required and agree to have a drug free workplaces, as a condition of receiving a contract or grant from a federal agency. However, misuse of drug testing or confidential information can subject a company to legal liabilities, considering the statutes governing civil rights. In this case indiscriminate drug testing is both unfair and unnecessary. It is unfair to force workers who are not even suspected of using drugs, and whose job performance is satisfactory, to “prove” their innocence through a degrading and uncertain procedure that violates personal privacy. Such tests are unnecessary because they cannot detect impairment and, thus, in no way enhance an employer’s ability to evaluate or predict job performance. In jobs where impairment of performance might directly affect safety and where employees work away from supervision, easy to use tests which actually measure impairment are available to employers. So, although drug testing is legal, it may be subject to constitutional challenge if testing results are indiscriminately revealed, if procedures for obtaining personal specimens do not respect the privacy rights of the person, or if testing is unnecessarily or excessively imposed. It is important that proper guidelines for the purpose of remaining on the right side of the law should a matter arise. As well as investigating and solving the matter immediately since the employees being targeted with the frequent unannounced drug tests can seek legal redress and thus subject the firm to unnecessary conflict with law enforcement agencies. To solve the issue, it is important to ensure that the drug tests are carried out within the precincts of the law such that all employees of the firm are subjected to the tests equally with no chances of favoritism or bias leveled against any of the employees (Wilton, 2016). This will ensure that all employees are content that no one is being looked down upon or treated differently.

What should the investigation include?

The investigations into the issue of random and biased drug testing exercises should include various aspects. First and foremost, the investigations should seek to establish whether there is reasonable suspicion to subject the seemingly the targeted group to random and unannounced drug testing sessions. This can be done by looking and investigating whether there are observable signs of drug use or abuse as well as signs of violation of the workplace drug policy.

The investigation will include the analysis and scrutiny of those suspected to be using drugs. Secondly, the investigations will focus on whether the random drug tests are in accordance with the federal drug testing laws (Wilton, 2016). In a random drug test at the workplace, the law states that every member of the workforce should be involved in the activity provided that they are employees of the firm. Conducting frequent random drug tests on only selected groups within the firm can bring about instances of stereotyping as well as discrimination based on the issue of drugs. The investigations will, therefore, include determining whether the targeted group is indeed on the wrong side of the law or display such signs (Ferrell, &Fraedrich, 2015).

Does the Drug Free Workplace Act apply here?

The drug-free act of 1988 is a United States Act which requires that federal grantees, as well as the contractor, provide a drug-free working environment for all employees. The risk is great if the contractor does not comply. Contractor or grantee who fails to carry out the requirements of the Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988 can be penalized in one or more of the following ways: Payments for contract or grant activities may be suspended, contract or grant may be suspended or terminated, contractor or grantee may be prohibited from receiving, or participating in, any future contracts or grants awarded by any Federal agency for a specified period, not to exceed five years.Being that the contractor is a government contractor, this means that the business that the contractor is handling is on behalf of a federal agency. In this case, the drug-free workplace act applies. As such, it is important that the suspected employees are constantly placed under drug tests to ensure that drug use in the workplace is not experienced (Wilton, 2016). Secondly, it is important that when carrying out such random drug tests, the drug tests laws and regulations are followed such that all employees are subjected to the drug tests and not just a select few. It is important that the tests ensure that the targeted employees are deterred from using drugs during official hours (Ferrell, &Fraedrich, 2015). Also, this exercise should ensure that employees who use drugs are either rehabilitated or dismissed from the firm depending on the policies of the firm. Finally, it is important that the tests comply with the federal laws and regulations that govern drug testing at the workplace since the workplace, being a government contractor, should be drug-free.

4.The manager at one of your locations calls you and wants to terminate an employee for having religious quotes in his desk area. The area is located in the back room and no one but that person has access to the room.

Do you make the person remove them? Why or why not?

The workplace should be a neutral place where there should be no be political or religious bias in any form or manner. In this scenario, the employee has broken the policies of the workplace by bringing in religious aspects of their faith. Although the backroom access is restricted to the employee only, it is important to note that the backroom is also part of the firm’s premises and consequently the religious quotes should not be inscribed or placed in the desk area (Wilton, 2016). It is unavoidable to let the person keep the religious quotes at his desk area. This is because letting him have the religious aspects at his area will prompt other people who happen to notice this to have their own religious quotes placed in their working area (Ferrell, &Fraedrich, 2015). Since religion is a sensitive subject, it is important that the workplace is kept free of religious leanings and that religious debates and aspects be banned within the workplace. The person has no other option but to remove the religious quotes at his working area in a bid to keep the workplace a religiously neutral environment where issues of religion are not campaigned (Wilton, 2016).

Can the employee file a lawsuit under the Civil Rights Act, Title VII (1964)? Why or why not?

The civil rights act of 1964 was a landmark labor law which sought to outlaw discrimination based on religion, color, sex, race, and national origin. Title VII’s of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits against disparate (different) treatment based on religion generally functions like its prohibition against disparate treatment based on race, color, sex, or national origin. Disparate treatment violates the statute whether the difference is motivated by bias against or preference toward an applicant or employee due to his religious beliefs, practices, or observances or lack thereof.In this case, however, the employee cannot file a lawsuit under the civil rights act title VII of 1964 because there is no form of discrimination that has been leveled against the employee based on religion (Ferrell, &Fraedrich, 2015). The employee, despite his religion, has been recruited and successfully employed for the position which he holds regardless of his religion. The only problem is that it is prohibited to bring religious issues to the workplace and as such, the employee is out of line regarding that policy (Wilton, 2016). Therefore, a lawsuit in that regard will be inconsequential as well as irrelevant since there is no form of discrimination expressed. Also, it is important to notice that all the other employees have not brought their religious ideologies to the workplace. Essentially, the employee should be encouraged to keep matters related to his religion personal and only restrict religious issues to his place of worship or at home as opposed to bringing them into the workplace.

Explain why the manager might not have a case for making the employee take the quotes down.

In this scenario, the manager might not have a case for making the employee take the quotes down from his working area. Notably, because the quote is in the employee’s desk area and is sufficiently private such that no one else apart from the employee has access to the place. This makes the place private in the sense that it would be impossible for someone else to come into contact with the quotes being that no one can access the area in the first place. Secondly, it is important to note that every employee should have the freedom and liberty to enjoy a workspace where he or she is comfortable and content. However, this should be in consideration of the rights and freedoms of other employees in the workplace.The employee is not causing any disturbance or infringing on the personal rights of other employees or even influencing the religious beliefs of others. This is because the quotes are present at his disposal only and not for any other person.