Utilitarianism
This paper is going to talk about ethics in the workplace and the two ethical theories of utilitarianism and the categorical imperative. This paper will also explain a real-life professional incident where these two ethical theories can be used. The theories will be explained and the real-life incident will be put in the context of the theories.
The first theory which will be put into the context of workplace ethics is the utilitarian theory. Utilitarianism is the form of an ethical theory that determines the binary opposition of right and wrong. This is decided by the focus on the final result of the incident or event. This is a theory that takes help from consequentialism. Utilitarianism assesses the fact that most of the ethical choices which are made are the ones that would produce the greatest positive outcome for the most amount of people. This is the only ethical theory that can be used to give justification for war and the military. It is also used for moral reasoning which is used in the business because business gives accounts for the costs as well as the benefits of the company. The theory is still subjective because humans cannot predict the future. This is why it is hard to predict whether the consequences of the actions are going to help many people or they are going to ruin it. Utilitarianism has a double form of accounting for values and morals such as virtue and justice. For instance, a hospital had four patients who needed four different organ transplants to survive, and the hospital decided to use the organs of one healthy person who came into the hospital. This would make the four people survive thus proving the point of the greater good for the most amount of people, but this would still not be ethical because it is being used at the cost of one life. Therefore, Utilitarianism is a reason-based approach, but it still has ethical limitations. Utilitarianism holds the fact that people are not just means to an end but they are the resultant end. Their happiness is the most important aspect in the world and if more people are happy by a particular decision, then it is ethically correct. There were several theorists in this ethical structure but the two main theorists were John Stuart Mill and Jeremy Bentham. They proposed the fact that the action which brought the greatest amount of happiness to the most amount of people was the only ethical action that was acceptable. For example, if the greatest amount of people were safe and happy at the expense of one individual such as shown in the story named The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas, then it was ethical and it was the right choice.
Categorical Imperative
Utilitarianism depends on the main rules of workplace ethics. According to this “golden rule,” an individual is responsible and concerned for the happiness of other people. This rule also states that ethical humans are those people who avoid causing any unnecessary harm and try to help others. This ethical theory is therefore concerned with the actions which always benefit others and do not cause harm. Utilitarian workplace values generally include honesty, professionalism, caring for colleagues, accountability, and avoiding conflicts of interest. There are mainly two kinds of utilitarianism that are applied inside a workplace, these are namely, rule utilitarianism and act utilitarianism. Rule utilitarianism talks about the concerns of fairness and acts utilitarianism talks about the benefit of the most amount of people through honest means. This helps the employees get along and have a healthy work environment where there is no conflict of interest. This theory chooses the most moral and ethical action for the benefit of other people.
The categorical imperative is a theory of ethics that was formulated in the 18th century by Immanuel Kant. This ethical theory talks about the fact that there are certain rules and sayings which cannot be refuted, for example, one should not steal. This is a categorical imperative. It is different from hypothetical imperatives such as one should not steal if they want to be famous. For Kant, there was only the presence of one categorical imperative in the aspects of morality and ethics. This was formulated in two different ways which were namely, ‘‘act only according to that maximum by which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law” and the second was “act as to treat humanity, whether in your personal or another, always as an end and never as only a means.”
Kant believed that these two forms of CI were equivalent and that both aspects forbid any violation of the rules. These two forms are similar in manner when someone is looking at moral reality and ethical values. These terminologies are equivalent because the aspects of reason and freedom make humans intrinsically valuable. Humans also demand rationality and reason which are both given in these two instances of the theory. These are the moral evaluations that humans want and are given. In other words, it is because other people have a reason as well a s the freedom that they should never be treated as a means to an end, and it is this rational thought which gives the criteria of evaluation found in the first impression of the CI. Both these imperatives are hypothetical and Kant means that the different commands depending on the different goals which are being fulfilled. These demands are the specific aims and goals which depend on personal situation and specific human goals and the dispositions along with the desires. Hypothetical imperatives command to apply to every human being and in specific circumstances for particular people who happen to have all these desires and these goals. The aspect of reasoning is also important in this ethical theory. Reason has a lot of functions; it has a theoretical function for example in science. It also has a practical function [8]. In the practical function, the reason determines the human behavior and choice but the practical function can be assessed to have two main parts, namely the means and ends function and the moral function. Kant does not refer to the moral reason with the calculative reason of utilitarianism for egoism. He does not condemn this particular side of the practical reason either. It has a proper place in human life and it is very important in human life. The calculation of means and ends must be supported with a very different type of reasoning which is moral reasoning. Human reason is very important and is constituted by universality and necessity. This concept of reason shows Kant to become deeply and profoundly influenced by the aspects of entertainment and the enlightenment and the pursuit of natural science.
A categorical imperative or a hypothetical imperative is the moral rule and a moral obligation that is necessary to be pursued because it is the person’s ultimate goal. For instance, a student has to study properly to get the greatest number of grades. This is created by society because the repercussions will be like a domino effect. If the student does not get good grades, they will not be able to go to a good college and so on [9]. The hypothetical imperatives are independent of the aspects of morality. Kant has held the fact that all the moral duties which are given to people are driven by categorical rules and ethics. These rules are categorical because they are universally applicable to everyone and in every situation. For example, it is imperative to be good to people. Kant has derived the aspects of the categorical imperative. According to him, it is important to act only by the universal rule through which the individual might be able to make it into a universal law. This means that the idea can be particularly exposed to the world as a relevant rule if it is applied by everyone and not just by one person.
Therefore, according to this human-made universal imperative, cheating on a test is considered immoral and should not be accepted. It is applicable for everyone irrespective of their social status and class. According to Kantian ethics, the aspect of categorical imperatives is counterintuitive because even though all individuals might be interesting to act in their self-interest, their actions have to be driven by their sense of duty to the human race. Kant also considered the aspect of self-improvement as well as preservation to become a dire obligation that is expected of everyone and placed on everyone. This is the reason that unproductivity, failure, or any form of self-destruction is immoral. The moral philosophy which is formulated by Kant is a normative theory that rejects the utilitarian idea that if the action is right, then that will make the most amount of people happy. He says that the motivation and not the result of an action is the actual determinant of the moral value of the action. This is to say that the motive or the means determines the moral value of an action. Kant said, “without rationality, the universe would be a waste, in vain, and without purpose.”The only manner in which this consciousness can be preserved on earth is by respecting and treating all humans as equal. For instance, it is not a crime to eat food if one is hungry or drink water if a person is thirsty but stealing the food without any requirement is immoral. This is applicable for any situation according to Kant. This implies that if a person is poor, even then they cannot steal food. However, Kant is not an anarchist. He understands the situation that for the ability of civilization to exist, a person must use themselves to get what they required they need to use other people as a means to get it. This is where the idea of respect and admiration comes in. respect does not discriminate against the person or the situation like the emotion of love can. An individual is a human and therefore, they deserve respect. Kant had named it the formula of humanity and it is not a controversial formation for theory.
This is where workplace ethics come in because there is a hierarchy that is maintained by every company and every person deserves respect in the workplace no matter what their position is. Conducting oneself with respect and integrity is essential in the workplace. The aspects of act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism will help in the proper guidance of the right ethical decisions in the business sector. For instance, an individual works in the IT department at a company. The individual is working till late at night on a project that the CEO and the boss require to see the very next day. To finish the project, they need technical data and they realize that the employee who has the data has not sent it to them. The person knows that the information is in the employee’s computer which is in the office and the individual might guess the password to the account. Now the question arises of whether the person should or should not log in to the computer to get the data. This is an ethical dilemma that can occur daily in the business world. There are several different processes by which ethics can be approached. One of these ways is utilitarianism which helps in the solving of ethical dilemmas.
Act utilitarianism evaluates all the incidents and actions independently and gives an evaluation of each dilemma according to the principles of utilitarianism. In the above case, getting the project done was more important and it was going to make or break the whole company which included all the employees. Therefore, if the individual breached the computer of another employee having the data and did that without telling them, it would not be immoral. This is because utilitarianism abides by the fact that, a greater number of people need to be happy with the action. This action would make the company reach positive heights and thus, according to act utilitarianism, this action was not wrong. This differs according to the situation and in this particular scenario, it is not a wrong action. This completion of the project is going to bring the greatest good to the greatest number of people and thus it is ethical to break into the employee’s computer because they have the technical data. Rule utilitarianism also approves of this because if the action is right and it brings the greatest good to the most amount of people, then the action should be implemented. In this case, the individual had to complete the project on time and that would need him to take the data from the employee’s computer without their knowledge.
According to the Kantian ethical theory of categorical imperative, it is a moral obligation of a man to be ethical and abide by the rules. Therefore, if the individual takes the data without the knowledge of the employee, it is immoral according to the theory. Even so, the project also needs to be completed and thus, the individual “must steal” the data from the computer of the employee who has the data. These different aspects of ethical dilemmas make the conduct at the workplace complex and complicated.
The company that will be evaluated on the ethical dilemmas and the ethical theories used by the employees is Oman Airlines, recently there was news that Oman Air had decided to cut jobs as the coronavirus pandemic was extremely rampant on the Gulf carrier’s flight schedule. This state-owned career had to reduce the number of flights and drastically suspend routes. Oman Air had to reduce the headcount after the pandemic had prompted the countries to shut down different borders and halt all the commercial flights. Middle East Airlines had lost almost 7.2 billion dollars of revenue from the pandemic according to the International Air Transport Association. The employees who were holding positions that would not be required anymore would be exempted from their jobs but they would be welcomed back after the airline resumed its full work. The airline did not respond to any requests or comments. This had become a huge ethical issue for the airlines because on one hand, the covid 19 pandemic had restricted the borders of several countries and the flights were canceled. This made the revenue cut off to almost half and thus the company had to let go of several employees because of the cut-off in the revenue. This was an ethical dilemma from two different sides because on the one hand there was the pandemic that was making everyone stay in quarantine and the other was of the employees and their wellbeing which would be jeopardized due to the halt in their jobs. An airlines company is an organization that provides air transport services to the people of a country and also transports cargo. There are over 5500 airlines in the entire world with ICAO codes. Airlines have different forms of market positions and different operating methods. The airline industry has had the most amount of toll in the pandemic along with the tourism industry. This is due to the closing of the borders and the halt in the international commute to different countries. The airline companies had to go through a lot of losses. Oman Air was one of those airlines that also had to cut off expenses and let go of employees.
Oman Air had put forward different clauses due to the covid 19 pandemic. The first requirement was to make sure that all the passengers had a vaccination certificate which showed that they were vaccinated at least 14 days before boarding the flight. This did not apply to the nationals of Oman and the people who are below 18 years old. The passengers were also required to have health insurance to cover COVID 19 expenses for one month.
This was a following of proper protocol but the main ethical dilemma came in the scenario where the company had to fire several employees and cabin crew due to the loss of flights. According to the utilitarian theory in the workplace, this is not giving the greatest amount of positive effect or positive outcome to the greatest amount of people, it is doing the exact opposite. This rule took away the livelihood of several people and left them without a job for several months. The second dilemma is that, if the employees were not exempted for a few months, they would have to work in adverse environments due to the pandemic and they could become exposed to the covid 19 virus. Along with that, the inevitable closing down of several flight routes due to the closing of borders compelled the company to take this decision because there were no flights to accommodate so many cabin crew. The cabin crew was paid 26 days in lieu. The company had to implement social contract theory in case of this ethical dilemma. In this case, utilitarianism is not applicable because on one hand it is definitely protecting people from the pandemic but it is also taking away their jobs. Social contract theory on the other hand talks about morality, politics, society, and political rules which have to be maintained according to Hobbes. After the political and social contracts are established, the society becomes a structure and people can be expected to keep their promises. In this case, the social and the political contract required the flights to be cut off and the borders to be closed which in turn made the exemption of cabin crew a default action like a domino effect. If there are no flights then the cabin crew will not be able to work and fly in those aircraft which will automatically take away their livelihood. In this particular scenario, the company almost did not have a choice with the decision they took. This is why they paid the employees extra money so that they were not completely without any backup. The company also used the aspects of the theory of Deontology. The theory of deontology states that the morality of an action should be based on the fact of whether that particular action is right or wrong under a series of rules and regulations rather than based on the consequences of the actions. In this case of the airlines, the rules and regulations compelled the company to stop flights which in turn made the cabin crew lose their jobs because there were no flights to accommodate them. The company promised their return after things were normalized but foe=r the covid restriction rules, they had to be exempted from the job. It is not right to take away people’s jobs but this is an exceptional case and it had rules which made the company take this dire decision.
According to this theory, the company did the right thing because they had to abide by the covid 19 protocols which could not be broken. They had to think about the greater number of safety which in this case was to cut the flights and restrict travel. If travel was not restricted, then the passengers could get the virus and be sick with a covid 19 variant. Unlike consequentialism, deontology theory judges actions by the rules. It does not see the consequences or the results as long as the rules are maintained. In this case, the airline company abided by the rules of the pandemic, and therefore, according to the theory of deontology, the airlines did not do anything wrong or unethical.
Even if the theory of deontology is applicable here in this scenario, and shows its strengths in this case, strictly following deontology theory can be detrimental. Rigidly following the deontology theory can result in people finding it unacceptable. In this scenario, the case was unacceptable for the employees who were fired. They lost their livelihood and that could not be accepted. Despite the strengths of the theory, rigidly following the aspects of deontology will be harmful. For example, a software engineer realized that a nuclear missile is about to launch which might start a war and ruin people’s lives. Now the engineer can hack into the system and stop the launch but it is going to be against the professional code of ethics to break into any software system without anyone’s permission. This is a form of lying and cheating. Deontology advises an individual to not break rules but if the person lets the missile launch, it is going to kill several innocent humans. Therefore, in this case, deontology cannot be accepted.
Oman Air had to cancel jobs from several cabin crew which according to deontology theory was correct, given the situation of the pandemic and the restriction of the flights but it was not correct according to the utilitarianism theory or the categorical imperative. According to both of these theories, the greater good of the people and the moral rules are very important. In this scenario, the greater good of the people is being fulfilled by protecting them in the pandemic but there is also the breaking of the ethical code because they had to fire several cabin crews which were also due to a helpless situation.
If the company had applied the theory of utilitarianism in this situation of ethical dilemma, then they would not have fired so many employees and they would have to find another way to help the employees keep their job. This would mean the change of the job profile and the lessening of their salary because the revenue was cut to half. This was because the flights were canceled due to the pandemic. The employees would be saved from being fired but it would still take away their initial salary. The usage of this theory would help the company in making the employees happy but they would also have to compromise on their salary and their mode of work. This theory would be applicable but it would also be complicated if it was implemented. According to the CL theory or the categorical imperative theory, breaking any rules is not allowed for the individual because it is a violation of all the laws which are universally applicable for the people. Therefore, according to the CL theory, the airlines took the right decision if stopping several flights and in turn, they had to let go of many employees. They did the right thing because they abided by the political and the governmental rules of the pandemic and protected the most amount of people by their actions. If they had taken the choice of the Categorical imperative theory, the consequences of their actions would be the same as it was initially and they would have to let go of employees because of the pandemic. The airline’s company compensated the employees with 26 days of their salary because that was morally right. If they had let go of the employees and also not paid them for a month, that would have been immoral. Ethical dilemmas like these arise very rarely and due to the covid 19 pandemic, these forms of ethical dilemmas were rampant in the tourism as well as the airline industries. Oman Air had to terminate the contract of almost 125 pilots so that they could cut costs. They were also sent to leave without pay. This is not right if seen from the utilitarian ethics point of view because ethics and respect in the workplace are essential. This protocol of firing the employees due to the pandemic was not the right thing to do but there was no other choice. The airline companies were not left with any other choice but to accept their fate and perpetuate this decision to the employees. This was the only way to cut costs and also protect people from the pandemic. There was already a loss of money due to the restriction of the tourism industry and the airline industry depending on the tourism industry. Therefore, this was a dilemma that had complex results which were neither good nor bad.
Ethical theories are essential to have a structure in society and to have proper rules. The different theorists wanted to establish and study the different ethical theories to understand how humans worked in society and to assess what was right and wrong. Sometimes some situations are complex and it can make a person question the authenticity of the right and the wrong. Several ethical aspects need to be kept in mind while an individual is in the workplace. Workplace ethics is a varied set of values that are different according to the people and the hierarchies. In the company. For some people, it is in a physical workplace that they go to on an everyday basis and others have a work from home. Workplace ethics is one of the most essential elements in a workplace and the job structures of society. Following the workplace ethics and the implementation of rules in a workplace are very important to have a systematic functioning of the company. This set of values and ethics are essential for the staff members to have a good work experience. Sometimes it so happens that, there is a complex situation such as the covid 19 pandemic and there are drastic changes in the policies of not only the workplace but also the whole world. These forms of drastic changes can bring ethical and moral dilemmas to companies and make them question their decisions. For instance, in the case of Oman Airlines where they had to fire several cabin crews due to the cancellation of flights during the pandemic. These kinds of scenarios cannot have the implementation of one strict ethical theory or structure because the situation is not easy and it is complicated. In these cases, the company might have to take certain decisions which are ethical in some cases and immoral in others. In those scenarios, the company and the leader of the company have to think about the betterment of the organization as a whole. Therefore, in the case of Oman Airlines, they had to think about the betterment of the whole organization during the pandemic when there was no revenue. This made them decide on firing several employees because the case of the pandemic is a special scenario and it does not happen every year.
The utilitarianism theory in the workplace would be applicable because it sees the biggest benefit for the most amount of people. If the company had decided to keep the employees during the pandemic, then there would be no jobs for them to do due to the flight cancellation and they would have their job but without proper payment because of the cut of the revenues. Therefore, the decision of the company to fire the employees with 26 days of payment was the only decision they could think of at that moment because they could not take any other decision because of the global rules of the pandemic which were universal. In this aspect, they used the deontology theory of ethics where the rules were more important than the well-being of the employees. If the rules were accepted and implemented then it was a moral act. Therefore, according to that, the company took the right decision. Oman Airlines and its decision were not wrong given the situation of the pandemic. If they had taken the utilitarianism theory, then the employees would have their jobs but almost no pay which would bring the same amount of misery as firing from the job brought. The company had a reason and they were honest about their harsh decision. They took this decision out of necessity rather than their desire. Every airline company had to take harsh decisions like these to compensate for the pandemic and the pandemic brought in several ethical scenarios like this for different industries.
Conclusion
Therefore, this paper suggested the two workplace ethical theories which were utilitarian theory and categorical imperative theory which were the best ethical theories for the workplace. The first theory suggests that the most amount of happiness for the greatest number of humans is always desirable and the actions of people are based on this principle. The second theory demanded that there be universal rules which have to be accepted and implemented. The company of Oman Airlines could not implement these ethical theories and implemented the theory of Deontology because they had to abide by the rules of the pandemic and fire several cabin crews. this was not completely right or wrong and they had to be compelled to decide this. They took this decision based on what was beneficial for the company in the long run. Therefore, they were not wrong and they were also not completely right. The pandemic brought an ethical dilemma which was could not be solved in a completely black and white manner. This caused the company of Oman Air to take such as difficult decision. They had to decide due to the pandemic and if they had taken any other theory such as the utilitarian theory, they would still have to keep the employees without payment which would not result in the fulfillment of their happiness and the application of the utilitarian theory.
References
Meske, C. Enterprise Social Networks as Digital Infrastructures – Understanding the Utilitarian Value of Social Media at the Workplace. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10580530.2019.1652448 (accessed Mar 3, 2022).
Samara, G. and Paul, K., Justice versus fairness in the family business workplace: A socioemotional wealth approach. Business Ethics: A European Review, 201928(2), pp.175-184.
Yang, H., Zhang, Q., Helbich, M., Lu, Y., He, D., Ettema, D. and Chen, L.,. Examining non-linear associations between built environments around workplace and adults’ walking behavior in Shanghai, China. Transportation research part A: policy and practice, 2022. 155, pp.234-246.
Hooker, J., Taking ethics seriously: Why ethics is an essential tool for the modern workplace. Productivity Press. 2018
Marseille, E. and Kahn, J.G.,. Utilitarianism and the ethical foundations of cost-effectiveness analysis in resource allocation for global health. Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine, 2019. 14(1), pp.1-7.
Scarre, G., Utilitarianism. Routledge. 2020
Aliman, N.M. and Kester, L.,. Augmented utilitarianism for safety. In International Conference on Artificial General Intelligence(pp. 11-21). 2019, August. Springer, Cham.
Robert, R., Kentish-Barnes, N., Boyer, A., Laurent, A., Azoulay, E. and Reignier, J.,. Ethical dilemmas due to the Covid-19 pandemic. Annals of intensive care, 2020. 10(1), pp.1-9.
Vearrier, L. and Henderson, C.M.,. Utilitarian principlism as a framework for crisis healthcare ethics. In Hec Forum 2021, June (Vol. 33, No. 1, pp. 45-60). Springer Netherlands.
Ramboarisata, L. and Gendron, C., Beyond moral righteousness: The challenges of non-utilitarian ethics, CSR, and sustainability education. The International Journal of Management Education, 2019. 17(3), p.100321.
Lindner, F. and Bentzen, M.M., A formalization of Kant’s second formulation of the categorical imperative. 2018. arXiv preprint arXiv:1801.03160.
Bagnoli, C., The Practical Significance of the Categorical Imperative. 2021
White, J., Autonomous Reboot: Kant, the categorical imperative, and contemporary challenges for machine ethicists. 2021. AI & SOCIETY, pp.1-13.
Bentzen, M.M. and Lindner, F.,. A Formalization of Kant’s Second Formulation of the Categorical Imperative. 2018, January. In ISAIM.
Piper, A.M., Waibel, V.L., Ruffing, M. and Wagner, D., . The Logic of Kant’s Categorical ‘Imperative’. Natur und Freiheit: Akten des XII. Internationalen Kant-Kongresses, 2018, January. 5, pp.2037-46.
Kharchenko, S., The categorical imperative of I. Kant as a universal philosophical-legal paradigm. ?????? ????????????? ??????????? ????????????. ?????????. ?????????????, 2019. (1), pp.82-86.
Pavlova, T., Zarutska, E., Pavlov, R. and Kolomoichenko, O.,. Ethics and law in Kant’s views: the principle of complementarity. International Journal of Ethics and Systems. 2019.
Grincevi?ien?, V., Barevi?i?t?, J., Asakavi?i?t?, V. and Targamadz?, V.,. Equal opportunities and dignity as values in the perspective of I. Kant’s deontological ethics: the case of inclusive education. 2019. Sociologija, 30(1).
Alshahrani, N.Z., Alshahrani, S.M., Alshahrani, A.M., Leggat, P.A. and Rashid, H., Compliance of the Gulf Cooperation Council airlines with COVID-19 mitigation measures. 2021. Journal of travel medicine.
Afifi, G.M. and Negm, M.F.Geological sites as a safe resort for post-COVID-19 tourism: The case of Al Jabal Al Akhdar, Oman. Journal of Environmental Management & Tourism, 11(6), 2020. pp.1520-1536.
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
