Within the five years have been employed by a large restaurant chain it has become obvious that not only do my peer employees knowingly ND purposefully, consistently deny their responsibilities, or even take ownership for their decisions, actions, or ethical standards, but also my managers, and even general managers prove to do just the same.
In most cases such as these, when negative and non functional attitudes or actions arise in a corporate work place such as this, not only does it cause problems throughout the company, but also lack of motivation, honesty, and productivity as well, not to mention if eliminated or relieved it can seriously increase a business’s success rate. In a corporate work environment similar o this one, where a person’s performance is supposed to be always supervised by the persons ‘upper,’ issues arise ethically all the time, because in most cases, with this many people to regulate, it becomes difficult let alone impossible at all to carry out the job.
At this location specifically I have seen an array of different ethical issues that have been crossed. At one point the general manager made the decision to try and fire one of the servers that was consistently missing their schedule shifts, having a bad attitude, and refusing to carry out the duties for their job. However, due to the Human Resources apartment and the regulations for documentation procedures of incidents allowing a legal termination, he was not allowed to actually do so.
With this being said, the employee had had two documented instances prior to this, by the general manager himself, although the first two times this employee had missed their shift, the manager on duty did not record it. In most cases, it would be assumed that this would have been solely a mistake, until word of mouth from this manager, to other employees aroused that this was actually done in spite of the general manager, and personal issues the management Taft had been having previously.
In this situation the general manager chose to privately inquire if the manager that was supposed to record the first two, could ‘back date’ a write up so that they had enough documentation to follow through with a fire. As a response the manager on duty refused, which created even more tension. Needless to say the employee at stake is still employed with the company, and there is still tension between the managers, the employee and the Human Resource department Of the company.
There are actually a few things seriously ethically wrong with this picture in which include every individual in this situation. Also there are similar ethical issues that are crossed from one employee to another, all the time. There will be afternoons where in the restaurant; you need four cooks, one bartender, four servers, and a manager. This means tattoo rely on these people to be on time, prepared, and ready to work.
However, in instances I have experienced, there will be four out of those nine people, most of the time including the manager on duty that knowingly drank a few alcoholic beverages before coming into work for this shift together. Not to mention the fact that insistently bartenders will open bottles of the liquor sold for consumption by the customers, and drink them while on the job. In all of these situations, serious ethical standers have been crossed, and offended.
In all these situations, as examined the offense to ethical standards is crossed all over the board by all individuals, and all parties included, which goes hand in hand with the business as a whole and how well it operates. In so many ways both of these instances, and the actions and reactions in all, conclude to be ethically wrong and improper. With the first example you notice that everyone in the situation is at fault for offending the ethical boundaries. First and for most, the general manager is at fault, and offending ethical business code of conduct for many reasons.
Ethically speaking, a general manager should be aware of the fact that before they are able to terminate an employee, there must be a just and right cause, with documentation of previous instances to prove that this termination is fair in theory and of no discrimination or unreasonable evidence etc. Therefore, not actually having the regulated three documented instances of disapproval for this employee loud be not enough evidence to actually do so or obviously be correct to do so, in the action of terminating this employee.
Also the general manager crossed serious ethical issues when asking if the manager on duty could create false documents and date them according to the timeline of incidents before the other two documentations. This is immensely immoral because it would be false documentation which is unethical, as well as putting the manager on duty in a position to create false and misleading evidence which is corrupt as well. Lastly, the actual process of misleading and lying to the unman resources department, and the employee at risk, is wrong and improper judgment and procedure.
Not only the general manager, is at fault for this decent discourage, but also the manager on duty as well. The manager on duty has the responsibility of dealing with and recording situations such as missing a scheduled shift, or not complying etc. If this person knowledgeably denies this responsibility and refuses to take the necessary procedure in dealing with these instances, then the manager on duty is not fulfilling their ethical duty as a supervisor, and a leader or authority for that matter.
Not to mention if it was for personal reasons that this responsibility is denied, and the proper fulfillment Of workplace duties is consistently not reached, than an even more course version of principled standards are offended. Similar to exactly this, the employee at risk is also seriously over stepping the boundaries of ethics in the workplace. By the verbal and physical action of refusing to fulfill duties at the workplace, as well as maintaining a negative and hostile attitude toward the management, and peers, an ethical standard is shattered not only for the workplace but for your arsenal self standard.
Justified guidelines of a workplace promote professionalism, restorability, responsibility, and reliability. This means that by knowingly refusing to follow through with what is expected in any of these aspects is proven to be ethically discouraging. Not to mention this employee actually informed human resources of this ‘unfair’ fire, knowing that they were misleading and misrepresenting themselves to the department, by refusing to take responsibility for the many negative instances and issues that had been caused by of them but were not recorded.
This is a personal workplace manipulation similar to that of the requests of the general manager for false documentation. This is obviously very wrong, and corrupt in itself. Although each individual in this example broke the idea of ethical standards, it didn’t end there. Because of this animosity, difficulty, and tension between all of the parties included in this situation, ethical issues were being crossed all the time from then on in the workplace through word of mouth, social slander, and judgment all across the board, as well as actions that were based on these opinions.
In so many ways this experience proves to be ethically shattering, and discouraging to the standard of a justified workplace environment. In the example of the employees that are constantly coming intoxicated to work for their shift, or employees that are constantly intoxicating themselves during the shift with access to the bar inventory alcohol, a very obvious standard is being evaded and ignored. First and for most, it is so obvious that a serious ethical standard is being broken by having workplace responsibility while being intoxicated and intoxication while at work.
Ethically it is unjust for an employee to not take responsibility for their actions solely because they under the influence, not to mention judgment, action and reaction time which is usually impaired. This meaning that in no way shape or form is it right for a person to let others in this type of workplace rely on them (the intoxicated employee) in this manner, let alone should this employee get hurt, or hurt someone else in the process, it is obvious how corrupt the idea of intoxication would be to add insult to injury.
Not only is this idea that breaking the standard or reliability and issue with alcohol consumption in the workplace, but also the idea that if the liquor being consumed by the employees is property of the workplace, that person is actually stealing from the companies inventories and assets, but also lying and manipulation their position in the business. This in itself is unethical in a business environment and personal environment. Lastly, it is seriously offensive to ethical standards for other employees or managers who are aware of the situation of intoxicated workers on duty, to not inform and punish or at least deal with the wrong doing.
Because by not taking this action, you are adding to the ethical discourage by refusing to maintain your job as a role model, and good employee yourself. Not to mention the refusal of maintaining the honest and reasonable standards as an employee of the company as a whole. Although to some in the workplace, noticing this destruction of ethically in business can be difficult if not affected at all, it happens consistently and chronically in a working business such as this.
It is easy to understand how often situations like this occur in a large corporate oracle similar to this, and how negatively (if at all) they are addressed, relieved, or even corrected, as well as how bad it really is. Ethical standards are created and encouraged to fulfill for many reasons effective to not only a cooperatively running business, but also in individual lifestyles as well. These guidelines and justifications are created to promote (or demand) a proper, fair, honest, and reasonable environment for everyone to be held according to.
The reason it is even necessary to create guidelines of some sort similar to this one, is because of how negatively and improperly ineffective it can come to a workplace environment or any environment in general to not regulate such harmful and unjust issues or impose guidelines to compare to. In the first example having to do with the human resource department and the miscommunication and misleading of firing an employee, it is very obvious how it actively affects the business as a cooperating whole as well as the employee and manager relation, moral, honesty, and attitude.
The discouragement in ethical standards affect the employee relationship, moral, attitude and honestly because of the examples that are set for them by their authority or leaders (management). When your leaders or mentors are lying, manipulating, and refusing to follow through with goals and responsibilities, your trainee or apprentice will follow the same ethical guidelines. Not to mention with this same idea most apprentices will not take authority from these managers and will not have comfort or trust in their leadership because of their ethical standards being low.
Because this is a consistent domino effect of people lowering their ethical standard in the workplace as following by example, and the discomfort or distrust in the ethics of the peers and adders in the workplace, this negative environment will grow and expand throughout the company resulting in a moral, and motivational decrease along with the value of the moral decreasing. And of course with this attaches a change in discomforting, harmful, and ineffective attitudes that are illustrated throughout the company.
Also, this example will affect a cooperatively running business immensely because with all of the above information included in the explanation, to go along with the untrustworthy, manipulative, and unjust processes to maintain the business revenue, and customer involvement will slowly but surely decrease in value the same way each individual relation did throughout the company, the company as a whole lowers in ethical value as well. Therefore this could not only seriously affect the income of the company, but also the proper production of the company, or even the company staying afloat legally in general.
If all of the employees and management in a business act and react unjust and unethical, than the business itself will stand in that same conception of unethical, and will be viewed and judged that way. In the second example when we notice that a location in ethical code of conduct is involving alcohol consumption while in the workplace, it is extremely apparent how an infraction such as this would affect both the business as a whole and each employee individually. Alcohol consumption before or on duty in a workplace is extremely unacceptable and illegal in many ways.
This is because it increases (or causes) danger in a workplace to not only yourself, but your co-workers, and customers as well. When a person knowledgeably creates this type of a situation there is already a violation of the peers trusts or comforts in that employees decision or moral etc. Not to mention this really can be a danger which might change the ethic to personal from professional. Also ethically a person’s judgment and mental state is Impaired when intoxicated which means a relationship or interaction with people can be much construed from what is meant.
And actions have to always be held accountable in a workplace which can be argued is difficult when intoxicated, meaning that a weak means of production is occurring throughout the workplace. Similar to in our other example it is also a part of an employee or managers ethical responsibility to report or inform if knowledgeable of this type of violation of the code of conduct. Without this being carried out, and the responsibility being denied, this knowledgeable person is also at fault for unethical procedure.
It is unethical because this person could have prevented loss of production or decrease in danger etc, and without documentation these things stay unethical and unjust. Not only does that value of production or service lower with the lower of ethics through intoxication, but also the actual income and consumption of alcohol in the business as a whole. Because some of these employees are actually telling and consuming the liquor that is property of the restaurant, the sales are decreased and the product inventory increases. In most cases managements will get in trouble for this type of ratio, and it is unacceptable.
Also it decreases that revenue potential of the company. Very importantly, when the ethically of your company lowers in value especially by something of this sort, customers or others start to notice, and legally it can actually be an extremely difficult issue. This can be for reasons anywhere from suing because of danger, or discomfort caused by the workers intoxication, or even gust simply if there is an undercover police officer or something of the sort. In this aspect this type of ethical issue would be extremely dangerous to the well being of the company.
It’s no wonder why it is imperative that the elimination or solving of ethical issues such as these would massively increase the productivity, attitude, moral, trust, relationships, and well being in general of a company. In some cases determining the best changes or implementations to follow through with this is more difficult than expected. Within the illustration of the firing recess through the human resources department and the unethical actions and decisions of the management, and the employee, a change in standards would cause a serious increase in the well being of the business.
With this being said a manager would have to hold themselves first and for most accountable to the highest ethical standard possible while in the workplace, while also acting and reacting correctly, carefully, and justly to identify these guidelines, and lead or role model others to do the same. Also a manager must maintain a completely professional and cooperative verbal and physical outlook and reaction to all other co-workers to relieve the situation of corruption.
Along with that, an apprentice or other employees would also strive to fulfill the same guidelines or goals. And in doing so, a manager should be held to the same standards for infraction documentation. When a manager does not comply with their decent responsibilities, similar to the employee in this situation, they should also be documented and reprimanded in the same manner to ensure fulfillment of their workplace requirements which in turn promote fulfilling others responsibilities. This will increase motto production, moral, trust, attitude, and accountability.
Lastly in our situation involving intoxication and the moral discouragement of safe and sober work ethics a mutation in the standards and increase in the value expected from the company and individuals will relieve all of the above issues that violating it cause. It is only normal that in a workplace the dissuading of intoxication, stealing, and lying always increases productivity, reliability and relationship throughout the company. By keeping fellow employees and customers out of excessive danger by choosing to not be intoxicated, there is already an increase in trust, reliability, and relationship between individuals.
There needs to be a security camera in the bar that should be under surveillance by the managers, who should always be held very accountable for their knowledge, reporting, and punishing for the ethical violation. This is will decrease product inventory and most likely increase sales because employees will be sober and more attentive and alert to customer needs and production. And similar to our above example, any one knowledgeable to the situation should hold others and themselves up to the same standards as the angers should.
In doing so, if the managers are aware of the other employees that are knowledgeable of the instance but not informative, than they should also be inflected and documented. All of these actions will improving increase the level of ethical standard, and increase the value of the company and each individual in it. Any violation of ethically that is questionable or doubtful can diminish the value of an individual and a company as a whole. In these instances it is crystal clear of the issue at hand, why it is so dangerous to the well being of the company, how it can be lived, and how it will improve the businesses and individuals well being.