While it is purely conjecture, maybe "taking one for the team" is more advantageous than "Mess - Up - Move Up".
In the "taking one for the team" theory, an employee vicariously becomes involved in an issue that has some serious liability issues for the company. This employee, simply by longevity on the job or the proximity to the people that are directly involved in the issue, knows a lot of information about the issue at hand.
Those that are in charge of fixing the problem find out that this innocent bystander could jeopardize the defense of the company if the innocent bystander told the whole story. This innocent bystander would of course have ethical conflicts about telling the truth, knowing that that course of action would be an end to their career.
But, what if this innocent bystander was offered a deal whereby if they "took one for the team" and only provided information that protected the company, this person would be offered a substantial promotion.
I don't know where I come up with these crazy, unsubstantiated theories. I must just dream them up.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
4 comments:
Wouldn't the "offering of a deal" make the company's position even more risky. Suppose the person takes the deal, they still have the knowledge and possible ethical conflicts.
President Nixon had a similar problem when he paid hush money. It never ends.
Of course keeping ones job and health insurance can buy silence and the company doesn't even have to worry about the consequences.
Of course all this assumes some degree of ethical behavior.
Wait, come to think of it aren't all employees who silently witness wrongdoing "taking one for the team"?
Is this what you are talking about?
You are a smart one Richard.
Yes, this kind of "taking one for the team" happens all the time. This is why whistleblowers MUST be punished. They arent "team players".
Do you have any idea how expensive health insurance is for a 55 year old guy with health issues? Who would blame that guy for "taking one for the team"? Ethical behavior is very expensive.
Imagine the consequences of universal health care......
Maybe this is why they business opposes it.
WOW....
Reminds me of the old "Sixteen Tons" song. You know, the one we hear playing on the local ghetto blasters:
"You load sixteen tons, and what do you get?
Another day older and deeper in debt.
Saint Peter, don't you call me, 'cause I can't go;
I owe my soul to the company store...
According to Travis, the line from the chorus "another day older and deeper in debt" was a phrase often used by his father, a coalminer himself.[citation needed]
This and the line "I owe my soul to the company store" is a reference to the truck system and to debt bondage. Under this system workers were not paid cash; rather they were paid with unexchangeable credit vouchers for goods at the company store (usually referred to as scrip). This made it impossible for workers to store up cash savings. Workers also usually lived in company-owned dormitories or apartment buildings, the rent for which was automatically deducted from their pay.
In the U.S. the truck system and associated debt bondage persisted until the strikes of the newly-formed United Mine Workers and affiliated unions forced an end to such practices."
Sixteen Tons - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
It may have been on the The Gradebook, but last year I read something about school systems building, and owning, affordable houses for new teachers. Talk about owing one's soul to the company store if and when that comes around.
The degree of ethics we each have is relative. The simple test would be to provide us with two poor choices and see which one we pick. For example, would we let our child starve or steal food?
I grappled with this issue once before:
Motel Special Ed: How To Sleep At Night
It appears to me that universal health care simply changes the payment by the company to payment by the government.
With the "payment by the company" plan, that is "income" to me, it just never makes it to my bank.
With the "payment by the government" plan, taxes will pay for it, which have to come from some one.
The gamble is will the cost of universal health insurance stay low enough so that my taxes don't increase by the amount that "the company" is paying now?
I don't trust that the cost of insurance will go down or even stay the same under the universal plan. Does the price of any thing that the government controls go down?
Post a Comment