Fairness in Hiring and Promotion

Fairness in Hiring and Promotion

THE PRINCIPLE BEHIND

Fairness in hiring or promoting employees and their basic rights and duties to the organization can be interpreted in different ways. These can be in line with the distributive theory, which states that all employees be treated alike at all times in every aspect of the organization or business. Or according to the tenets of the utilitarian theory, which argues that what is good or moral is that which contributes the greatest good to the greatest number and avoids all possible harm. The distributive theory sees the individual for what he is, while the utilitarian theory measures him according to his contribution.

Among the many ethical issues in the workplace or business are fairness in hiring and promoting and employees' rights and duties (Murdock, 2011). One theory, which can be used to address these issues is the rights of justice theory or distributive theory. This evolved from the ideas of philosophers Immanuel Kant and John Rawls. Another, and opposing it, is the utilitarian theory. The distributive theory considers or includes employee welfare in corporate decisions. The utilitarian theory, on the other hand, puts the welfare of society or company above individual needs and welfare (Murdock).

Distributive Theory

The most widely used has been that of John Rawls, which he expounded in his books, "A Theory of Justice" and "Political Liberalism (Lamont, 2007). In both works, he proposes two principles. The first says that every person has a claim equal to any other person to equal basic rights and liberties. Everyone has equal political liberties and in the same scheme. The second says that social and economic inequalities occur when they are attached to positions and offices available to all under fair and equal conditions of opportunity. At the same time, these inequalities accrue to the greatest benefits of the least advantaged members of society (Lamont).

In justice and out of a sense of fairness, persons agree to share one another's conditions and fate (Lamont, 2007). They design institutions to secure the resources of nature and social circumstances only for the common benefit. The assets collected are fairly distributed among the diverse members of a group. Everything is done in the spirit and as an act of fairness to all members in exact sameness (Schlinds, 2011). Nothing is done to the detriment of any member. In an organization, everyone receives the same type and quality of treatment as any other member. A "veil of ignorance" dominates this workplace in which every member sublimates some of the things they know about themselves and others. This is done so that all members can continue to behave as equals and contribute to society in this way. Rawls argues that authoritative positions in an organization should allow any employee the chance to occupy a new position, whatever his or her background. Experience and qualification will not make a difference. Both the experienced and inexperienced may compete for the same vacancy position (Schlinds, Lamont).

Strong arguments have been raised against this theory. It goes against the very purpose of an organization to hire, develop and promote employees for greater responsibilities and professional fulfillment and higher salaries. Employees are paid differently and according to their skills, educational background and length of service to the organization. If all employees are paid alike or equally and their qualifications, performance and duration of service were ignored, they will be demoralized and discouraged. Equal or identical treatment will inversely encourage idleness, inefficiency and lack of ambition. Without motivation and a low level of efficiency, the business itself will sag and fail altogether. Another strong argument is that not all employees deserve the same salary rate or amount of vacation or personal leave. Newly hired employees should not enjoy the same benefits as employees who have worked for many years. These loyal employees will surely react against the unfairness of equal treatment.

Rawls' theory will not be feasible in an established company but for a new one. A newly formed company can accept new employees in equal or identical terms. There will be no envying, no competing. Everyone begins in the same and equal footing for those who will occupy identical or similar positions and responsibilities. Management can make their rights and duties clear at the outset and everyone is treated alike in a new environment. They are immediately informed about company expectations as well.The spirit of Rawls' theory of fairness can be adopted in this situation. The important thing is that the employee as a human being is the focus and viewed as intrinsically valuable on his own.

Utilitarian Theory

Main advocate is John Stuart Mill. Mill advanced that the moral worth of actions should be judged by the consequences, which follow (Wilson, 2002). Utilitarianism states that an act is good or moral if it produces the greatest amount of benefits over harms for everyone involved. The end or means is not as important as the projected maximum benefits for those involved. This is the more frequently used method by most people for the purpose of achieving the greatest amount of good or preventing the greatest harm. This thinking guides most businesses and business analysts, lawmakers and scientists. Jeremy Bentham established the principle of utilitarianism, which seeks the greatest good for the greatest number. Its proper end, and only end, is pleasure, or parts of it. Mill sees that pleasure is the very purpose and end of morality (Wilson).

Applying the utilitarian theory to the workplace, it states that correct conduct will generate the greatest happiness for the greatest number (Gilani, 2011). Like the distributive theory, it clearly delineates what is morally right from what is morally wrong. It does so by pointing to the consequences of acts, which result in the happiness or well-being, or the opposite, of the majority. It observes the Golden Rule in the workplace or business. This states that every member of the organization is responsible for as well as concerned with the welfare and happiness of the rest. It also states that ethical persons are those who avoid or prevent harm on others and help them in whatever way. The theory deals with actions, which produce benefit and avoid harm. It values honesty, loyalty, professionalism, caring, accountability and conflicts of interest, among others (Gilani).

The two types of utilitarianism in the workplace are rule utilitarianism and act utilitarianism (Gilani, 2011). Rule utilitarianism is about fairness, while act utilitarianism is about doing good for the benefit of others. Rule utilitarianism will seek to benefit the majority through the most fair and just means. Act utilitarianism, on the other hand, will choose the most ethically correct action to benefit everyone. Today's work is no longer meant only to obtain income but also for meanings, ambition, beliefs and personal passions. Work is no longer individualistic but has become more collective and collaborative, focused on communal good and benefit. It establishes ethical norms, which influence the behavior of all the members of the organization. It determines workplace conduct and disciplinary action for ethical violations. It fosters advantages, such as stronger team work and productivity, positive public image and a more cohesive organization (Gilani).

Weaknesses of this theory include the failure to consider employee motivation (Gilani, 2011). It is also difficult to attain and sustain when no written policies or strong operational procedures support it as the organization's culture (Gilani).

Resolution

Rawls' distributive theory treats every member of an organization or business not only equally but also identically. It discourages competition as it does contention. No one leads and no one follows. This is applicable only to a new business or organization, which set this norm of equal distribution of rights and duties. It can create such a policy, which no member of the organization can object to, as everyone is new.