paragraph

PHI 4301, Business Ethics 1

Course Learning Outcomes for Unit V

Upon completion of this unit, students should be able to:

5. Formulate ethical solutions for real-world situations using ethical theories and concepts.
5.3 Determine whether an organization’s hiring practices should consider diversity.

Required Unit Resources

Chapter 6: Ethical Decision Making: Employer Responsibilities and Employee Rights
It is not required to read the Questions, Projects, and Exercises at the end of the chapter.

Unit Lesson

The lesson for Unit II, in the discussion of principle-based moral perspectives, mentioned Kant’s ethics. An
important principle in Kant’s ethics is known as respect for persons. It is so important that Kant himself
thought all of morality is ultimately derived from this principle. In his Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals
(1785), Kant says, “Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or the person of
any other, never simply as a means but always at the same time as an end” (p. 429). An end is simply the
thing we want to achieve. In business, which means revenue, profit, capital, growth, etc. Means are the things
we use to get the things we want. For example, advertising is a means to increase sales, which means to
increase revenue. What Kant is saying is that it is always, and in all circumstances, wrong to treat a person
(including yourself) as a means to an end—as having only instrumental value. As rational, autonomous
individuals, persons possess intrinsic value.

The respect for persons’ principle is an assumption that pervades business ethics, particularly with regard to
issues of employer responsibilities and employee rights. Because employees work for businesses, it is natural
to infer that any individual employee is simply a means by which the business succeeds. Countless examples
lurk throughout history, such as in the Gilded Age, where businesses regarded employees as a collection of
more-or-less interchangeable bodies to be put to work as cheaply as possible. Similar practices persist to this
day in sweatshops across the developing world. As Arnold and Bowie (2003) suggest, respect for persons is
the moral principle behind our strong moral intuition that such practices need to change.

As noted in the textbook, in the United States today, the employer-employee relationship recognizes respect
for persons variously through the legal enforcement of due process, civil rights, and just cause (Hartman et
al., 2024). The situation is by no means perfect, as the controversial legal doctrine of employment at will
attests; however, employees are now more protected from arbitrary use of the power employers have over
their employees. When worker exploitation does occur, employees have greater access to resources for
seeking remedy.

We can see the principle of respect for persons play out in the context of downsizing, which is one of the most
difficult decisions a business can make. If eliminating a portion of the workforce were simply a means for
cutting costs and increasing profitability, then it would not be a moral issue. It is respect for persons that
makes downsizing a moral issue. “When a firm decides to downsize…it is critical to lessen the impact as
much as possible and to allow the terminated employees to depart with dignity” (Hartman et al. 2024, p. 205).
This entails giving notice of intent to downsize, careful management of the downsizing process, and sensitivity
to the employees affected.

Employee health and safety is another area where respect for persons has come to dictate business practice
in the United States. Many occupations entail a certain amount of risk for bodily injury, mental distress, or
other harms. On the face of it, allowing employees to decide whether or not to engage in risky occupations

UNIT V STUDY GUIDE

Employer Responsibilities
and Employee Rights

PHI 4301, Business Ethics 2

UNIT x STUDY GUIDE

Title

suggests a respect for their autonomy (Hartman et al., 2024). However, employers have an unfair advantage
when it comes to controlling job information and options available, and thus can (and do) seriously constrain
what employees can choose to do. If your choice is between dangerous factory job A and dangerous factory
job B, is your personal autonomy really respected? Because the unbridled free market often fails to respect
employee health and safety, regulations and standards are the responsibility of government.

Diversity is undoubtedly the most controversial issue, where respect for persons arises in the workplace.
Suppose a company institutes a hiring program with the purpose of increasing the racial diversity of its
workforce, based on the premise that companies with a more diverse workforce are more profitable. The
dominant racial category in the workforce will find its proportional representation decreasing as a result.
Applicants from the dominant racial category will be disadvantaged compared to applicants from other racial
categories currently underrepresented in the workforce. Individual applicants who have been disadvantaged
in this way might feel the hiring program violates respect for persons, specifically their own persons; however,
the company argues the program promotes respect for persons by addressing implicit biases in its current
system of hiring. Further, the hiring program serves a legitimate business good (profitability), and the rights of
all applicants are respected in the process. If applicants for a position are well qualified but do not get the job,
this does not amount to a violation of their rights; no one has the right to be offered a particular job in the first
place.

On a final note, the relationship between employers and employees is another area in business ethics, where
the commitment to moral principles and the commitment to good consequences both point in the same
direction. We have seen how the principle of respect for persons shapes our understanding of how employers
ought to treat their employees. As the principle has been observed more consistently, both in this country and
abroad, it has proven to be good for business (Edmans, 2016). Humans like to associate themselves with
organizations where they are respected. In business, this natural affinity translates to a more productive and
resilient workforce.

References

Arnold, D., & Bowie, N. (2003). Sweatshops and respect for persons. Business Ethics Quarterly, 13(2), 221–

242.

ct=true&db=bsu&AN=9975527&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Edmans, E. (2016, March 16). 28 years of stock market data shows a link between employee satisfaction and

long-term value. Harvard Business Review.

ct=true&db=bsu&AN=118706360&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Hartman, L. P., DesJardins, J., & MacDonald, C. (2024). Business ethics: Decision making for personal

integrity and social responsibility (6th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.

Kant, I. (1785). Groundwork of the metaphysics of morals. Longmans, Green, and Co.

Suggested Unit Resources

In order to access the following resources, click the links below.

The following article examines the responsibilities of multinational enterprises when using offshore
manufacturing facilities.

Arnold, D., & Bowie, N. (2003). Sweatshops and respect for persons. Business Ethics Quarterly, 13(2), 221–

242.

ct=true&db=bsu&AN=9975527&site=ehost-live&scope=site

PHI 4301, Business Ethics 3

UNIT x STUDY GUIDE

Title

The following article examines the long-term value of stock returns among companies with high employee
satisfaction.

Edmans, E. (2016, March 16). 28 years of stock market data shows a link between employee satisfaction and

long-term value. Harvard Business Review.

ct=true&db=bsu&AN=118706360&site=ehost-live&scope=site