posted by Anonymous .
Consider the following scenario: You are aware of a problem that is costing your company productivity. This problem is caused by a fellow employee who refuses to use current technology. This employee has asked you to keep the situation to yourself, since he is one year from retirement and does not want to lose his job or have to endure new training. This employee is also very popular with everyone at the company. You have just been asked by your superiors why you think your division is not as productive as it could be. Do you tell the truth? What are the ethical considerations involved in this decision? How should one deal with this kind of ethical ambiguity?
Tell what you THINK is the truth. Since when is telling the truth an ethical ambiguity? What kind of college is teaching otherwise?
My God,you should have already pointed out to the individual how he was limiting production.
Here is a nice rule to get you through business and a happy marriage. Don't lie.
I can empathize with this employee. I retired from teaching a year early, partly because I knew I'd have to learn new technology. (I'd already taught for 32 years.)
My personal ethics dictate that this employee be kept on -- perhaps in a similar job that doesn't require current technology. Loyalty to the long-time employee carries more weight with me than a slight reduction in productivity and profits.
Although I'd rather tell the supervisors the truth, I'd base my decsion on how these people might react.