Mastering Social Work Values And Assessment Answer

Case study

The issues of ethics can be further explained by a situation where an individual has to decide whether to keep a fully loaded gun in the car in the parking lot without giving a second thought regarding the permission of the parking lot owner. An individual is allowed to keep a gun as long as the individual has got a valid license (Thomas, 2011). No legal party, political force or law can hold the individual guilty if the person can provide a valid license of the gun in possession. However, the question arises how moral is the act when an individual is keeping a gun in the car while the owner is not aware of the fact (Akhtar, 2013). This act can be unethical as the car parking lot owner is not aware of the fact that the individual is keeping a gun in the car. Some situation of unrest may arise in the area that may lead to a raid. Provided that the individual who has kept the gun is not available at that moment, the police may catch hold of the car parking lot owner and hold him guilty regarding the possession of the gun. Hence, it is the duty of the individual to take necessary permission from the lot owner before keeping a gun in the car so that the owner does not end up in trouble (Berry, 2013).

An employee might have the legal right to park the car anywhere which has a loaded gun inside it. However, the action cannot be morally justified. Provided any difficult situation arises in the area as mentioned earlier, the lot owner might get arrested due to the car in the parking lot. It will be against the ethics of the individual because the lot owner will be brought under legal prosecution due to the action of the individual (Bredeson & Goree, 2012). To avoid any difficult situation, it is the duty of the employer to see that certain situation does not arise in the area by implementing certain rules and regulations. Though individually a person can possess a gun, and no other individual has a right to question the action, however, the individual cannot keep a loaded gun in the car in a public area. By implementing such a rule, the employer will be able to avoid any uninvited circumstance as well as protect the other employees from further disturbance. Stress resulting from the pressure in the workplace is common nowadays, if the individual succumbs to the pressure and indulges in some unsocial activities as the individual has the gun in possession will invite unnecessary problem in the workplace (Das Gupta, 2010). Though a situation like that is not likely to arise, however, the employer should implement certain rules just for the safety concerns of the other employees (De George, 2010).

Any situation of unrest or problems within the company should be left to the company to solve the matter. However, the legislature should get involved if the satiation goes out of hand. A company may implement various rules for the welfare of the employees and it is the duty of the employees to adhere to the rules of the organization for the safety and security of the remaining employees (Demmke & Moilanen, 2012). However, the legislature cannot put an individual under prosecution for just carrying the gun with a valid license. However, in case the person is carrying an illegal gun, then the legislature has to get involved in the situation. In addition to this, if there is a tension arising from the possession of the gun among the organization then the company can take necessary help from the law to bring the situation under control (Denzin, 2013).

On the other hand, the company might allow the individual to keep the gun, though such an action is not necessary by the part of the organization but the every organization may have their rules and regulations. The organization may justify the decision by citing that there can be problems within the organization where the possession of the gun with an employee might help, however, it is the duty of the company itself to handle such serious situation other than depending on some employee’s weapon (Gavai, 2010). It is the duty of the company to be well equipped so that such a situation does not arise at all. In addition to this, the more important duty of the company is to control the employees and the environment of the organization so that such a situation never arises in the workplace. While seen from another point of view, the decision of the company to let the employee keep the gun might be unethical; from the company’s part as it will violate the rights of the other employees (Shaw, 2011). When an organization employs an individual, it becomes the duty of the organization to look after the safety and security of the employees. Provided that the individual who has a gun might go might through a tensed situation and uses the gun either on himself or on any other employee then the owner of the organization will be charged for such a decision along with the individual who will be guilty of such a gruesome action (Murthy, 2010).

Conclusion

Thus, it can be said that the differentiation between ethical and unethical is a difficult issue. It is up to the organization to decide what is ethical and what is not by implementing certain rules and regulations in the organization. Though it is not illegal to keep a gun when an individual possesses a valid license, however, it is the duty of the organization to look after the safety and security of the employees and introduced rules and regulations to provide the employees a healthy environment to work in.

References

Akhtar, F. (2013). Mastering Social Work Values And Ethics. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

Berry, P. (2013). Fostering spirituality in the workplace. New York: Business Expert Press.

Bowie, N., & Schneider, M. (2011). Business ethics for dummies. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Bredeson, D., & Goree, K. (2012). Ethics in the workplace. Mason, OH: South-Western/Cengage Learning.

Das Gupta, A. (2010). Ethics, business and society. Los Angeles: Response Books.

De George, R. (2010). Business ethics. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall.

Demmke, C., & Moilanen, T. (2012). Effectiveness of public-service ethics and good governance in the central administration of the EU-27. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.

Denzin, N. (2013). 40th anniversary of studies in symbolic interaction. Bingley, U.K.: Emerald.

Gavai, A. (2010). Business ethics. Mumbai [India]: Himalaya Pub. House.

Murthy, C. (2010). Business ethics. Mumbai [India]: Himalaya Pub. House.

Shaw, W. (2011). Business ethics. Boston, MA: Wadsworth/Cengage Learning.

Thomas, R. (2011). Business ethics. Bury St. Edmunds: Ethics International for Centre for Business and Public Sector Ethics.