Ethics the act that any action are

Published by admin on

Ethics and business means that
professionals must hold a standard of moral and ethical duty to their obligations
and duties. In this case the ethical issue is sexism in the gig economy. What
is gig economy, it is an environment in which temporary positions are common and
organizations and companies contract independent workers for short periods of
time. Sexism is an issue on the grounds that it is morally wrong to treat one
person better than another let alone one-person base on their sex. I believe
not just one ethical model is modeled in this case but two is, Utilitarianism
and deontology. Utilitarianism is the act that any action are the only
standards of right and wrong. This case shows this ethical model by the actions
of the businesses showing sexism and favoritism towards males over females. It
is wrong to treat one gender lesser than the other. The other ethical model in
this case is deontology. Deontology is the study of the nature of duty and
obligation. I believe this is shown in this case because business individuals
that show a sense of duty and obligation to their job, should not be wronged
and mistreated.


The pertinent facts of this case are that sexism is morally and
ethically wrong. A code of ethics is attainable to guide the actions in this
case. A company code of ethics sets the companies values, ethics, objective and
responsibilities. An industry code is where principles of honesty,
professionalism, and confidentiality combine to support the professions
success. Professional code is the ethical benchmark for professionals around
the globe regardless of job title, cultural difference or local laws. The companies
code of ethics in this case should highlight the value of their employees,
ensure that they act with integrity and respect, and place the interest of the
client above their own. The company’s industry code in this case is where the
professionalism of the employee to client is seen. For example, where Schneider
inadvertently used Hallberg’s email signature in his messages to the client and
the client’s tone was rude until he mentioned to the client that it was him and
not Hallberg. The companies professional code should be fair and ethical across
the bar. All employees should be held at the same standard and with that those
who outperform other colleagues whether male or female should be given the same
opportunities of promotion and respect.


The important
stakeholders in this case are Schneider and Hallberg because they are the
employees. Both Schneider and Hallberg decided to perform an experiment to see
how clients would react if they switched signatures and acted on each other’s behalf.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

Ultimately Martin Schneider is the beneficiary due to the fact that his
signature provided a more positive response from clients. Nicole Hallberg is
being harmed because her signatures provided a negative response from clients.

The benefits that were received were those of Martin because the clients
trusted his opinions and feedback rather than Nicole. Schneider’s rights were exercised
because he received more respect and honor than Hallberg did. Martin received negative
and condescending feedback while Nicole received positive feedback. Hallberg’s
rights were not denied but they were not respected in an honorable manor as
those of Schneider’s. By doing this experiment martin saw first-hand how women
are treated and he didn’t like the results. The experiment showed that male privilege
puts woman at a disadvantage and shows how impossible it is for professional
women to get the respect they deserve.


Some alternative strategies to
remedy the issue in this case would be to 1) demonstrate more women in a
powerful role, 2) allow women to speak more freely, and 3) ensure positions are
earned fairly and not biasedly. In every alternative the managers, HR, and
board of directors should be key players in this case. These three classifications
of individuals cover an expansive extent of what makes the business. Managers, oversee
employees on an everyday premise while HR handles issues of misconduct on different
levels. The board of directors settle on the important decisions they represent
the organization and search for the best advantages of the organization. All
the more the board of directors tries to make sure that there is no negative
business or conduct going on within or adversely out of the company’s walls. These
alternatives will help remedy a portion of the sexism and male mastery that goes
ahead inside the working environment. All representatives should feel important
and comfortable when they appear to carry out their duty.


The alternative strategies to remedy
the issue in this case are to 1) demonstrate more women in a powerful role, 2)
allow women to speak more freely, and 3) ensure positions are earned fairly and
not biasedly. Showing more women in powerful roles will not only show that
women are capable and qualified to hold such a position, but more so that more
woman than man are capable to hold a highly qualified and commonly male
dominated position. Often times women are pushed aside rather than given the
promotions they deserve and statistics show that there are persistent gender
gaps in pay, hiring and promotions across occupation and skill levels. Women
are looked at to be less likely to handle stressful situations, and are deemed
too emotional. With respect comes a voice and women should be allowed to speak
more freely so their skills will be seen and valued. While these skills are
being reviewed they should not have to be demeaned and harassed based on their
looks. The harassment in private and public sectors show that sexism is still
alive and well. Lastly ensuring that positions are earned fairly and equally
will make for a more positive and efficient work environment. These three
alternatives will have outcomes that will have positive and negative effects. Each
alternative can change the nature of the work environment and the efficiency of
the work being done. These alternatives will help women in the work environment
for the better but it may also show that the men in higher positions aren’t so
qualified or didn’t deserve the positions they were in. The effects of Martin
Schneider would be minimal if this course of action is followed. Schneider is
currently being treated better and given more respect not because he is a
better employee but solely off of his sex. The effects of Nicole Hallberg for
alternative one is that if she was demonstrated in a more powerful and
respected role than clients would respect her opinion more. Alternative two
would affect Nicole by giving her more of a voice and her employers seeing how
she is being treated and how clients are responding to her work. The last
alternative will affect Nicole in the best way because if every position is
earned fairly and not biasedly than she would have a fair chance in the
workplace. I believe these alternatives satisfy both the utilitarian and deontology
ethical models.

These alternatives satisfy the utilitarianism
ethical model because it states what’s right and wrong. In this case it is
extremely wrong that Nicole is treated in a rude matter than martin is. It is
also wrong that the burgeoning gig economy affects gender and other forms of
labor discrimination. The good in this case is that the rise of alternative
work arrangements may offer the opportunities for women to close the remaining
labor market gaps. I believe it supports deontology in light of the fact that
it is there duty to ensure that women have a place in workplace environments
and give women the upper hand sometimes rather than always men. I consider the
stakeholders whom are not important in this case to be the customers. I
consider the customers to not be as important because they are not being
affected in the gig economy. The employees are the people that are being
affected and more so the woman than anyone. The men have a positive outcome
from the gig economy and earn greater platforms than deserved at times. The truth
is that whether the workplace is created more equally for all employees that
does not change the prejudices and biases of the customers to employees. Although
woman may start to get the upper hand in more situations that will not change customers
opinions of if women are qualified and trustworthy to give them feedback.

Thought that is morally wrong that is the way the workplace is and is something
that should be drastically changed. The business industry has adopted this stereotype
that women don’t bargain and they aren’t willing to bargain. There is a misconception
that women employees will be take advantage of more than male employees when
individuals are barraging their salary. I don’t believe that at all times they
are taken advantage, I just think that individuals have more confidence to ask
when there is a female interviewer. Most times people don’t think that the
female interviewer necessarily knows what they are talking about but that is
not always true. People should give women more respect and not just give men
more respect and trust their word just because they are a man.


I recommend that HR evaluate and monitor some of the behavior and
work that is taking place within the company. HR needs to address the sexism
and male privilege issue that is going on within their company. Deontology
supports my recommendation for this case because the nature of duty and
obligation are a strong factor in this case. The fact is that sexism is morally
and ethically wrong. HR are the individuals that will handle misconduct, sexual
harassments, etc. These individuals have a duty and obligation to see that all
of their employees are being treated fairly and equally. Statistics show that
women are treated unfairly in the work environment and the gap is at a
staggering high, the gig economy suggests that freelance work may make the
problem of male privilege even worse. If employees have a duty and responsibility
to carry out the duties of their job in a respectful and ethical manor, then
the employers should ensure that they are protected and in every aspect in the
work place. Utilitarianism supports this recommendation by clarifying what’s
right and wrong. It is clear that it is wrong that Nicole was being treated
differently than Martin when her signatures were sent to clients. Although HR
should be held accountable they cannot change the prejudices and discrimination
against women. The code of ethics that would be applicable in this case to
improve the issue would be company values, responsibilities, and honesty. The company
should see that the values, responsibilities and honesty are fulfilled within
every employee no matter the classification.








        Code of Ethics.

Galperin, Hernan. The Gig
Economy May Strengthen the ‘Invisible Advantage’ Men Have at Work. 3
            Jan. 2018,


Categories: Industry


I'm Iren!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out