Michael Rabins' Commentary on "Informing Employees about Layoffs"
Let us first consider the issues confronting Tony in part I
of the case. Tony does make a compelling case about not wanting
to be a Scrooge and ruin the Christmas holidays for his
workers. Having personally been in somewhat similar
circumstances (on both sides of the issue) earlier in my
career, I can attest that it is very appealing for many reasons
to adopt Tony's non-Scrooge stance, if all other things are
equal. Unfortunately, they rarely are. For example what if one
of Tony's workers is offered an attractive new employment
opportunity over the holidays, and, not knowing about the
impending layoffs, turns it down because he enjoys working for
Tony so much? Or what if someone else personally purchases an
expensive new instrument for his own tool chest that will
enable him to do his job better for Tony? Or what if still
another worker has signed up for an intensive three day short
course over the holidays to improve his performance on the job
for Tony?
There are many different scenarios that could emerge that
would make it inconsiderate for Tony not to inform his workers
immediately of the layoffs. In fact, just about the only
scenario that would make it considerate is if all of the
workers do not get involved in any personal or professional
planning for the future over the holidays; an unlikely event.
What is involved here is the golden rule or the Kantian respect
for persons philosophy. Tony, as group leader, has the
responsibility of thinking through his options, considering all
of the possible consequences of his actions that he can, and
then asking just how he himself would want to be treated if he
were in the place of his workers. This is a tough situation for
Tony to be in, but presumably he has demonstrated the necessary
mental toughness for the job or else he would not have been
promoted into it. Also, taking on these tough responsibilities
is exactly what he is being paid for as an administrator.
In phase II of the case a different issue has arisen. Once
Arnold has his embarrassing chance conversation with Ralph at
the church Christmas Eve service, Tony now stands indicted of
not just poor judgement but also insubordination. Depending
upon Tony's and Arnold's prior relationship, it is entirely
possible that the angry telephone call from Arnold to Tony on
Christmas Eve could end in Tony being fired. If Tony decides
not to be a Scrooge and delay termination notification to his
15 workers until after Christmas, he must tell Arnold of that
decision immediately. He cannot blindside Arnold on this since
there may be other factors that are involved that Arnold did
not take the time to explain to Tony. For example there may be
some year-end payroll considerations, or year-end benefit
commitments that kick in if the workers are still on the
payroll on January 1st. Aside from the insubordinate nature of
Tony's action of not doing what Arnold tells him, it is just
plain disloyal and, when you get down to it, stupid. The
subsequent event between Arnold and Ralph certainly supports
the shortsightedness of Tony not telling Arnold that he was
going to delay his layoff notifications until after
Christmas.
Cite this page:
"Michael Rabins' Commentary on "Informing Employees about Layoffs""
Online Ethics Center for Engineering
8/17/2006
National Academy of Engineering
Accessed: Tuesday, May 22, 2012
<www.onlineethics.org/Resources/Cases/Informing/InformingRabins.aspx>