The original Seven Essays, in a cool, new outfit ...
Call 412-567-OXEN [6936] Fax 412-567-6936 Email - [email protected]

All posts in General Questions

Tim Rowe owns a small trucking firm that specializes in local and metro-area delivery in large city in the United States.
All employment activities are handled by Tim who has always hired employees on the basis of three qualifications :

1. They must have a high school diploma;
2. They must pass a short paper-and-pencil test which is given to all applicants; and
3. They must have a valid driver’s license if applying for the position of driver.

The short test is interesting, as it was devised by Tim from sample questions found on a GED (General Education Degree) Equivalency Test. The test consists of 33 vocabulary and mathematical questions, each worth 3 points. Anyone scoring below 70 is automatically rejected.

Last month two drivers quit, so Tim advertised in the local paper for two new drivers. Ten people applied for the openings, but Tim rejected four applicants because they were not high school graduates. Three others were rejected because of test scores below 70. The two white males hired scored the highest on the test, had high school degrees, and also had valid driver’s licenses.
This week Tim was notified that two equal employment complaints had been filed against him and his firm. One complaint, a woman, alleges that the test does not measure a person’s ability to drive and is not a valid predictor of job success. The other complaint, a minority man, alleges that the high school diploma requirement is not related to ability to do the job and unfairly discriminates against minorities. Tim is trying to decide how to respond to these complaints.

Questions:

1. If you were an EEO investigator, how would you evaluate this selection procedure?

2. Which requirements might be viewed as job-related?

In 100 words or more discuss the following – Some have criticized Sarbanes-Oxley as an overreaction to a few very bad situations and have called for its repeal or a modification of some of its requirements. What do you think about this? Would there be a way to achieve the goal of ethical corporate governance without overburdening companies to comply with all the present requirements of SOX or do you think the present requirements are necessary? Does the cost of SOX compliance hurt the U.S. economy by discouraging successful private companies from taking their stock public?

Hello Rahul,

As always, thank you for your help. I have a new short essay I need help with.

Thank you very much!!

Here are the directions for the essay:

During the last few years there have been a number of public corporations that have gone bankrupt at the expense their investors. Most would say an investor should expect to lose their money since there is a certain element of risk whenever you invest in the stock market. But in these high profile cases many of the investors were in fact employees of the firm who were investing in the firm through their 401K funds retirement programs.

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act has been passed to help cut down on some of the risk to investors whether they are company employees or pure and applied investors.

Define the Sarbanes-Oxley Act with special emphasis on the purpose of this legislation, how the act has been implemented, documented success of the act to this point. Evaluate if more regulations or laws are needed on the books.

Argue whether rank and file employees who are simply building up their savings should be considered and protected as another class of investor. As a specific example of this, one Enron Lineman had a 401K pension fund of $341,000 and in three days his pension fund was worth $1,200. Is it ethical to work all your life to arrive at this point or are these simply risks each investor takes. Do we have an ethical right to protect these investors?

Finally, does putting white collar criminals away for long periods of time seem like the best answer? Should they be working to repay their victims?

Reduction in Force (RIF) was a frequent dilemma that was also connected to hiring policies. Managers described filling permanent positions while knowing that a RIF could take place at any time. The procedure for RIF was also ethically problematic to managers:
The part I struggle with is that under the RIF format, the supervisor, me, gets told on Thursday what supervisees have to come in on Friday to get chopped, and they are to be gone that day . . . Gone that day. And I personally believe that that’s unethical . . . not because it’s severe, but because it’s not balanced . . . We would not tolerate any employee
doing that to us.

■ What personal and professional values are connected to this dilemma?
■ Analyze the dilemma from the perspectives of feminist, Afrocentric, and Ghandian moral principles. How does each inform you about the elements of the dilemma that could promote good or harm?
■ How would each perspective lead to particular leadership actions and decisions about this dilemma?

Hilda Homeowner said to her neighbor, Paulette Painter, “If you paint my house, I’ll pay you $1,500. All you must do is finish by the end of the next month. My price assumes that you will pay for all of the paint and any needed supplies.” Paulette decided to paint the house. She purchased some supplies as well as enough custom-colored paint to complete the job. On the morning that Paulette was about to begin painting, Hilda told her that she had changed her mind and would not pay Paulette to paint the house. What will be the result if this case was heard in a court of law? Why? Discuss the rights of each of the parties in this situation.

According to Cheesesman (2006), there are seven Schools of Jurisprudential Thought as follows:

1. The Natural Law School emphasizes a moral theory of law.

2. The Historical School believes that changes in societal norms will be reflected in the law

3. The Analytical School emphasizes the application of logic to the facts in each case.

4. The Sociological School proponents are realists, believing that laws are a tool to shape social behavior and looking upon precedence with disfavor.

5. The Command School believes that, rather than being a reflection of current social norms, laws are enforced by the ruling party to maintain their power structure.

6. The Critical legal Studies School, which views laws as a barrier used by the powerful to maintain the status quo, rather than applying arbitrary rules of what is fair.

7. The Law and Economics School, which promotes market efficiency as the central goal of legal decisions

Assignment Instructions

1. Choose ONE School of Jurisprudential Thought and write a 500-750 word paper about that school. Include information about the development and history of the school and the current application of the school in criminal justice today. Include at least three properly formatted (APA) references.

Requirements:

Title your paper with the name of the School of Jurisprudential Thought that you chose.
500 to 600 words
Double Spaced
Margins no larger than 1.25″
At least three references, properly formatted in APA style

1. Analyze the following ethical dilemma from the perspective of rationality and respect.

A local nonprofit organization that networks with other service agencies in the area was designed to fill gaps in needed services for families. This agency has been in existence for several years and has gained the respect of the community. The staff of this agency can serve families who have a need that cannot be served in any other way through connecting these families with community volunteers who adopt them. The volunteer director of the agency works on a volunteer basis and contributes numerous hours each week to fulfill responsibilities associated with this position. To reduce her workload, the director of the agency applied to seven different foundations to request money for a part-time administrative assistant. The agency requested $10,000 from each of the foundations, with the hope that they would receive assistance from one of them. To the surprise of the director, three of the foundations accepted their proposal and awarded the agency with $10,000 for the salary of the part-time employee. The agency ended up with $30,000, which was three times as much as was needed for the salary. The granting foundations had different requirements for reporting on the use of the money. However, at least two of the foundations asked that the money be used in the manner for which it was requested.
■ What are the known facts?
■ What facts are missing that need to be obtained?
■ Who are the potential stakeholders? (for example, agency, clients, public/community, or grantors?)
■ What are the potential outcomes, both good and harm, for all stakeholders?
■ Who would you seek out for input, advice, and consultation?
■ What does your conscience say to you about this dilemma?
■ What are the values and perspectives of those who could be affected by your decision?
■ What ethical principles apply? What do they require in this situation?
■ How do the ethical theories?the means or duty versus the ends or greatest good? apply to this situation? How would you link the two?
What would be your decision?

2. In order to take action, what political, natural, and social forces need to be considered?
3. What is your civic obligation for the good of the organization and the good of the community?