Are Lay-Offs Immoral? Ethics of the Recession…
The New York Times’ Sunday Magazine featured a column from Randy Cohen, “The Ethicist,” on the immorality of corporate lay-offs. I thought the piece was very interesting and brought up a lot of points that people may be thinking but aren’t saying out loud. Plus, he’s a funny writer, too. Cohen makes broaching the depressing topic of how evil corporations treat human beings like objects is, well, less depressing.
“Mass layoffs relegate people to the status of disposable objects. A
company can mothball its welding robots (although I hear the new models
can wake themselves up and contact some kind of killer robots of the
future who will travel back in time and terminate us all). But people
are not machines. Many ethical systems mandate that you do not treat a
person like a thing. You must regard other people as full human beings
with the same moral rights as you. And that must include the right to
make a living.”
Cohen goes on to suggest alternatives to immediate lay-offs as well as shames some CEO’s for their gargantuan salaries. We’ve all been hearing about corporate greed for months, but in treating the issue as one of morals and ethics, Cohen lends a new element to the shame these giants should be feelings. It’s not all just part of the big corporate game, it’s personal immorality. And that’s the kind of stuff that gets people thinking and maybe taps into that old consience a little bit. Take a read. It’s worth it and humorous.
Some readers, of course, found no place in business speak for ethics. Take a look at the comments. Read Cohen’s reply to these commenters here.
Twitted by enchantmentrose said
May 31st, 2009 at 3:21 am[...] This post was Twitted by enchantmentrose – Real-url.org [...]
recession guide said
June 3rd, 2009 at 3:56 pmI’m inclined to agree. To many employees are treated as robots rather than human beings. It’s not just with layoffs. Look at the stingy vacation time Americans get in comparison to Europeans, and the lack of rights when it comes to unions, health care and sick pay. It all seems incredibly un-ethical.
Beverly Weinstein said
June 4th, 2009 at 3:27 pmThanks for the feedback and for reading! Any suggestions on other topics you’d like to see covered?
Kevin Killion said
June 9th, 2009 at 7:22 pmIf you don’t want the deal, don’t sign up with the company. Simple as that. If the deal changes, and you don’t like the new deal, go somewhere else. (Admittedly, that’s more challenging to do during a government-induced recession, but the principle remains.)
No company wants a reputation as a lousy place to work. They’ll lose good people, they’ll find it much harder to recruit good prospects, and they’d have to adjust compensation to compensate for their reputation.
A public corporation is in even a worse spot: they have a fiduciary responsibility to get returns for their owners (which probably include you, through your mutual fund). If they try to hang on to unnecessary staff despite evident business reasoning, management can find itself in deep trouble or sued.
Private corporations always have more latitude to retain people in times of stress.
CEO salaries hardly ever make a dent in overall corporate expenditures. Divide an extra million dollars of perks to a CEO by 20,000 employees and you could give everyone a $50 bonus. Par-tee! But if by paying an extra million you can get someone who has the experience, vitality and connections to produce $10 million dollars more in business, everyone wins.
What *IS* a problem is when interlocking corporate boards take care of each other, to the detriment of both stockholders and employees, or seek (and win) government protection against free competition.
The worst case is when corporate dealings like that involve government bureaucrats as well, with Geithner’s machinations being the worst of the worst.
Dominique Ziman said
March 14th, 2010 at 8:29 amIt?s terrific that you took your time to write down this post it?s stimulating to find out another?s point of view. I respect your piece on this page, and I?ll return for further reading.reading.