New York Times:
In mid-May, British Global Services announced 15,000 job cuts, while Japan's Sony continued cutting 16,000 jobs. Here in the U.S., 5.7 million jobs have been lost since the recession began in December 2007. To cite one example, Caterpillar, the heavy equipment manufacturer, is moving to layoff more than 20,000 workers. These days such mass layoffs are sadly unsurprising, but are they ethical?
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Sober minds among conservatives have long wrestled with this issue.
I think the consensus was that corporations should be allowed to execute unneeded workers. That way there are no benefits at all that have to be paid to departing workers - either by the company or the government.
Of course if the 13th Amendment were repealed, it might give workers some protection. The master might be disinclined to damage his own property.
As someone who's been laid off multiple times, I can tell you that corporate management is only interested in preserving its own personal wealth. The "maximize shareholder value" mantra we're told is the reason why corporations cut, cut, cut personnel and resources is hogwash. The only shareholders they truly care about are themselves.
We've been fed so many lies about the good business does that it's hard for people to think through the fog of business knows best. It doesn't, never did. But once upon a time we had rules they had to follow and even some very decent CEOs ( they were called presidents then) who understand that you made money by making products and services people wanted to buy. A philosophy that seems as dead as the Dodo.
In the 90s I voiced the opinion that calling personnel human resources was a mistake. Humans should not be treated as resources which are used and discard. Have we had enough yet? That's the real question. Are we willing to fight for decent jobs, wages and benefits.
Does it strike you as VERY wrong that the CEO who lays off thousands of people, many decade long employees still gets to take home a multi million dollar salary? None of the senior managers of failed companies are losing their homes, pensions or helathcare. They are the American aristocracy and it's time for a revolution. Off with their heads!!!!
But if folks like you and I aren't willing to make sacrifices who's going to lend a helping hand to the more fortunate?
It is unwarranted when top siphon major corporate income...
Whoever said... was needed? those executive compensation companies hired by executives...
that is where we need ETHICS control
Unethical? How about fabricating an employee's record so a worker is deemed inelegible to apply for another job in the company? Then comes the layoff notice. Yes it was done to me and others who had all worked for a finance company 15 or more years. Yeah lots of luck appealing it to your friendly HR department ! Companies can pretty much lie, cheat and do anything they want as long as they document manufactured "facts". Good luck finding a lawyer that will handle that case in todays economy. At least you might have a fighting chance if you are in a union.
Almost forgot the best part. The manager who was ORDERED to lie about my work record actually came clean and had the nerve to ask for my forgiveness after he was laid off shortly thereafter
There's nothing like the sincerity of a death bed conversion.
I got laid off 6 weeks ago, the contractor that i worked for got his lines of credit revoked by the banks. A client owes him 125K and has not payed him, This is a good man and employer, treats you like a human being which nowdays is really something!. I do not know who i feel worce for , him or me.
Moral Obligations to workers? Than went overboard with employer sponsored pension plans…
When CEOs layoff employees by the thousands to cut expense and meet financial benchmarks, and thereby increase their already bloated over-compensation, it is absolutely unethical.
Do you think this would have been allowed on George Washington’s watch?
Yes. George Washington, and the overwhelming majority of the Founding Fathers, didn't believe in government intervention of private business practices. Would George Washington HIMSELF have used such practices? I sincerely doubt it. But he wouldn't have condoned the government doing something about it either.
Business schools spend very little time on ethics and most of the time encouraging Social Darwinism and "Greed is Good". Of all the thousands of books written by the most thought-provoking individuals and U.S. colleges choose Ayn Rand as a basis for "education". I expect Britney Spears biography will be required reading for core at Yale and Harvard in the next decade.
Capitalism and ethics are totally incompatible. The goal of Capitalism (as professed by notable Capitalists) is to hoard as much as you can and make everyone else poor. It's a thoughtless battle of elimination and only those with a combination of OCD and total lack of morals will last to The Finals.
Ethics and Business parted company somewhere around Reagan.
You are correct! Today the mafia is more ethical than most businesses! The slide started in the mid 80's and both political parties failed to stop the decay. But the Republicans really facilitated the corporate raiders and the unfair business practices that have taken over in the Market.
When long term older employees are laid off simply because they are long term older employees, than YES, layoffs are unethical. Right, Starbucks?
Oh, and why are companies receiving bailout funds - or any government subsidies, tax breaks or other accommodations, for that matter - allowed to lay ANYONE off?
I know, I know. It's socialism to interfere with business. Uh huh. Sure. Suddenly after trying to force welfare recipients to jump through increasing numbers of hoops, they're outraged that anyone would put conditions on accepting taxpayer funds. Yup, here in Bizarro World, Corporate Welfare Queens are SUPPOSED to ride around in Cadillacs, eat at fancy restaurants, exploit as many loopholes as possible and NEVER give an honest day's work in return.
Layoffs should be the absolute last resort. It's pathetic that no CEO has the balls to stand up in front of the media and say they put their people first; that they would try every other tactic before letting people go. The publicity and goodwill from the press and general population would make it nearly impossible for amoral directors and large shareholders to retaliate.
Before cutting jobs, companies could reduce overall salaries - starting at the top. Hard times call for shared sacrifice. The article linked in this post rightly cites the upcoming 7,500 layoffs at Motorola along with the CEO's $104 million 2008 compensation package. Their BoD will be fine with that, of course. Too many companies are using the recession as an excuse to cut salaries or eliminate jobs, which only serves to enhance the bottom line for a quarter or two yet does serious long-term damage to the economy.
Whatever. Nothing these "people" do to the rank-and-file workforce surprises me anymore. Nor does the collective apathy of people who could be next up for a pink slip... Tea bag, anyone?
The application of ethics to the behavior of American capitalists? This is strictly an academic exercise.
One company here in central Texas recently laid off 30% of its QA and Development Software Engineers -- turns out that the upper management had been spending most of its time at marketing conferences. But not staying at hotels -- staying at luxury $5K/night/person spas.
The bookkeeper that revealed this was simply appalled (which is why she informed some of the people there). Each night that these narcissistic poufters were busy getting their massages and hot mud baths was another month of salary for another engineer they stole. Wow, everyone is so impressed with their leadership. Not.
It's pretty obvious that the upper management at CTD Enterprises (CTD stands for "Circling The Drain") are just going to make off with as much of the cash as they can while the whole thing implodes. Why should they care about the company, the product, the workers that produce the product, if they can just grab the gold and hightail it down to Mexico?
Ethics? It is to laugh!
Ehics in this economy seems a bit incongruous and talk about ethics is a bit too late.
It sponges one's conscience while attending the wake.
Loading comments…
First Posted: 05-26-09 05:13 PM | Updated: 05-26-09 06:01 PM