Empress Luxury Lines, Case Study Example

When determining what his obligations are to this subordinate, Kevin Pfeiffer, what decision would Antonio Melendez most likely reach if he applied the utilitarian approach to decision making? Antonio Melendez obligations to his subordinate morally is to take the right course of action for the benefit of the company and the employee. However, Antonio utilize the utilitarianism approach which is a moral principle that holds that the morally right course of action in any situation that produces the benefits for everyone. Kevin Pfeiffer is the computer technician that reported the damage to underground wires and computer circuit to cost $15,000 in repairs.

Kevin did not feel right about the unmoral act Antonio wanted him to commit by hiding the damage from insurance adjusters. Furthermore, Antonio believes the course of action is justified if everyone benefits but the utilitarianism approach. Antonio Melendez does not care whether the benefits are based on manipulation, deceit or outright lies. In the decision making process Antonio is responding to the upper management needs, therefore Antonio Melendez straightforward utilitarianism method for deciding what is morally right course of action does not care is others are hurt. The driving factor is the company overall benefits from hiding the damage to the computers that will provide the company millions in the future for lying. Finally, Antonio Melendez decision was the best example of utilitarian approach because Antonio choose to instruct an employee to hide the damage wires so the company could make millions in the future. Antonio was forcing Kevin to make an unmoral decision to keep their jobs and in the graces of upper management. Antonio utilitarian methods is calculated assigning values and benefits that override the morally right thing to do in this case. However, the psychological make-up of Antonio using the utilitarian methodology truly believes that are doing the right thing to help the company gain revenue instead of a loss of $15,000 for repairs.

What conclusions would probably result in he employed the individualism approach? If Antonio Melendez applied the individualism approach the motivation would be being rewarded or promoted for personal benefit. In this scenario, Antonio would encourage Kevin to complete the removal of the damage computer wires that would make Antonio look good in the eyes of upper management. In addition, anyone that was competing with Antonio would motivate her to outperform them by resolving the computer repair issue in favor of the company. The company basically rewards Antonio for selfish rewards that benefit the company but does not promote or advocate teamwork. The conclusion is Antonio Melendez would be only motivated by projects that would showcase his own individual strengths. In addition, Antonio would not be interested in promoting or rewarding Kevin for his performance.

Put yourself in Antonio’s position and decide realistically what you would do. Is your response at the preconventional, conventional or post conventional level of moral development? How do you feel about your response?

If acting in Antonio position, the preconventional response would be applied in this situation. This level of moral reasoning would make me do the right thing because I would not want to suffer the business consequences from upper management. In addition, the fear that the punishment would be the loss of my job or respect of my peers. The response is standard for most people because they care about their jobs, salary and benefits. The punishment is too great for them to take a chance on losing their jobs. Realistically, people naturally will protect their way of life and follow the moral right thing to do in this scenario.

If Antonio or Kevin were fired because they reported Empress ‘fraud, would they be justified in removing all traces of their employment at the cruise line from their resumes so they do not have to explain to a prospective employer why they were fired? Why or why not?

Ethically, the right thing to do is put the job on your resume especially when an employee has been at the cruise line for 10 years. It will be large gap to explain to the new employer. In this case, the right thing for the fired employee to do is put the job on the resume. The fired employee can provide a reasonable explanation that can be discussed in an interview or they can put released mutually. This would be true because you did the right thing morally and it would be easy to explain to the new employer that it was about ethical differences.

The most important thing they must remember is not to say anything negative about the previous company. For example, the fired employee could say” we have different ethically views but I am thankful for ten years of computer training. These are the transferable skills I can bring to  your organization. The alternative method would be when the employee only worked at the cruise line for a month or two. The fired employee needs to put the job on the resume because later they could lose their job for not telling the truth on the application. Honesty is the best policy because they complete a background check which shows you worked on the cruise line may prevent your hire.