Professional Documents
Culture Documents
January 2011
Table of Contents
Abstract
1.
Introduction
2.
2.1
2.2
3.
Legal Frame
11
3.1
12
3.2
4.
19
4.1
Kantian Perspective
20
4.2
Utilitarianism
24
5.
28
5.1
28
5.2
31
34
36
40
5.3
6.
47
56
57
7.
61
Conclusion
Abstract
The present study argues the importance of ethical principles in human resource
management systems, especially in decision making and treatment of employees
during involuntary dismissals in reference to the Greek legal deregulations and local
business practice. The fundamental conceptual ethical theories, Kantianism and
Utilitarianism are presented. The role of HR Professionals, as well as Direct Managers
during Dismissals is argued and a fair decision making and process frame for ad-hoc
dismissals and redundancy conduct is developed. The introduction of a Termination
of Employment Request (TER), as a necessary HR tool to preserve ethical conduct of
ad-hoc dismissals is further applied in a real business case and comparative analysis is
presented to prove that there is an Organizations social responsibility to establish HR
Policies that protect the psychological contract more than legal regulations.
1. Introduction
The on-going debate over increasing demands for deregulation in the field of
employment relations, restructure of the labor law provisions regarding employees
dismissals and diminishing welfare state services appear to be contradictory to the
development of corporate social responsibility and shared value concepts, which,
consequently, end being not much more than rhetoric. The fact that the definitions of
Corporate Social Responsibility refer to actions beyond legal requirements indicates
that there is a challenge for the Human Resource Professionals to act as Ethics Agents
and preserve the psychological contract between the employee and the employer.
Ethics is about how people ought to behave and so it focuses on duty and
boundaries of right and wrong. However, ethics focus on shared value systems that
serve to direct the behavior of individuals in organizations in a productive direction in
order to resolve moral problems that commonly arise. The task of applied ethics, such
as Business Ethics, is to say and define what kind of action is Good Business Life.
The task is twofold: on the one hand business practices are described and analyzed,
and on the other hand advice is given to business practitioners on how to make good
choices and decisions (cf. Beauchamp and Bowie, 1979; De George, 1989).
Normative moral philosophy aims at determining what ought to be done, which needs
to be distinguished from what is in fact practiced. Deontological and Utilitarian
perspective will be reviewed in this study, in order to assess their applicability in
functioning fair HRM practices related with dismissals.
to an audience with sanction authority and the standards used are based on shared
value systems. (Buckley, 2001, p.16) According to this interpretation, our research
emphasizes that HR Professionals are expected to become accountable for developing
ethically structured Organizations.
exploring and defining CSR above all internally and then informing stakeholders.
Typical questions for organizations working on CSR from an identity orientation are:
What is our role in society?, What are our values? and How can we incorporate
and strengthen our values in our operations? Given its internally value driven focus
this strategic approach is closely related to the value-driven and moral organizational
approach. (Schoemaker, Nijhof, Jonker, 2006) Under this frame, the impact of
identity-orientation on CSR is primarily observed in internal processes and policies.
organization. Under this moral view of the stakeholder, the primacy of the managers
relationship with the shareholder is no longer assumed and is replaced with the notion
that the managers must act in the interests of all stakeholders in the Organization
(Evan and Freeman, 1984). Stakeholder theory is cast as a form of deontological
principles, such as no individual should be used merely as a means to an end.
Combining the kantian terminology with the stakeholders theory, we admit that each
of the stakeholder groups within an Organization has the right to not be treated merely
as a means to some end, and therefore must participate in determining the future
direction of the firm in which they have a stake. This approach of interpreting
Organizational life values and priorities further implies a reconceptualisation of
capitalism. ( Greenwood, 2002)
this perspective we analyze the implication for HR Professionals, who are called to
establish the frame and create the tools for the Management to respond to this
demanding role. Indeed, for an organization or an executive, who has decision making
role, it is not at his expense to take leadership, but to accept responsibility.
More analytically, in the center of the target there is the Individual Right of
Employment, as well as any right related to the individual that can be violated during
the dismissal process. According to this interpretation, we observe that HR Policies
and, especially, the existence of any official policy that has been ethically established
may provide the maximum protection for the employee (i.e. financial aid,
outplacement program, etc) while in case it does not exist the decision makers
motives are the ones that may set a more protective frame for the employee (i.e. fair
decision making elements, involve the employee in the process, etc) and finally,
legal provisions set the minimum standard of protection for the employee (i.e.
minimum remuneration, etc)
Legal Provisions
Decision Makers
Moral Principles
HRM Policies:
Dismissal Process
10
3. Legal Frame
Despite which of the two controversial approaches on applied ethics and CSR
someone adopts, it is commonly accepted that the legal regulations are the ones that
establish the bottom line which the Organizations should respect and comply with.
According to this acknowledgement, it is of a cornerstone importance to admit that
job security has been turned into the most contradictory employee relations issue due
to the constant deregulation of labor legislation in Europe, and consequently, Greece.
This fact consequents to looser legal processes for involuntary dismissals, compared
with previous decades.
11
12
due to lawful trade union or political involvement not welcomed by the employer, or
because an employee resorted to an intervention by work inspectors or the courts, or
generally exercised his rights in a manner that dissatisfied the employer). Specifically,
dismissals due to redundancy are treated by the courts as abusive when an employer
does not follow the proper social order. In order for them to be valid, according to a
descriptive approach the employer should take into consideration a table of wage
earners classified into four categories on the basis of objective criteria, namely work
output, period of service, family responsibilities, and general financial condition.
13
14
This dramatically onerous situation for the employees overturns any guaranteed
in international conventions fundamental civil and social rights. Furthermore, it is
absolutely incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights, which
guarantees the right of property or the right to private and family life, with the
European Social Charter, which enshrines the right to fair and decent working
conditions, the Charter of Fundamental Rights EU, which recognizes the right for
decent employment, as well as the International Labour Conventions with similar
settings. (Vlachos, 2010)
Collective dismissals are due to economic or technical reasons, and exceed the
dismissals limit specified in the relevant law per month. Traditionally, in Greece, this,
so-called, employee-centric protective frame against collective dismissals, consists on
15
the power for the Administrative Authority to act decisively in order to prevent them.
When Greece joined the European Union, this context expanded to consultation in
order for the employee representatives and employers to reach a mutual agreement,
prior to the Administrative Authority dismissals approval. It is common practice that
the Administrative Authority does not approve the collective dismissals, unless an
agreement between employer and employee representatives is reached, which rarely
happens.
Nevertheless, the recent law 3863/2010 as well as 3899/2010 does not change
the nature of the aforementioned protection; more specifically it does not remove the
decisive intervention of the Administrative Authority, since, according to the new
regime, collective dismissals cannot be fulfilled, unless agreed by employees
representatives or administrative authority. This is particularly positive, given that in
all EU countries except for Spain, the Administrative Authority cannot thwart the
collective dismissals, since the employer decides on his own.
Nevertheless, the main drawback remains the significant reduction of the legal
provisions and boundaries beyond which redundancies are characterized as collective
and, consequently, become subject of consultation and Administrative Authority
intervention. Of course, this expansion seems to be quite mild, applicable in largesized companies, without exceeding the framework of European law and without
violating any fundamental rights, to the extent that the redundant would not receive
greatly reduced reimbursements, according to what is already reported in the previous
section.
16
(1387/1983)
(3863/2010 3899/2010)
as in
Written Notification
Written Notification
redundancy reimbursement
Doubled reimbursement, after the first
the dismissal
monthly installments
Table 1:
3863/2010.
17
In the field of labor law deregulation, the term of flexicurity is, primarily,
presented by Wilthagen and Tros, referring to a degree of job, employment, income
and combination security that facilitates the labor market careers and biographies of
workers with a relatively weak position and allows for enduring and high quality
labor market participation and social inclusion, while at the same time providing a
high degree of numerical (both internal and external), functional and wage flexibility
that allows for labor markets (and individual companys) timely and adequate
adjustment to changing conditions in order to maintain and enhance competitiveness
and productivity. Despite the official description of the term flexicurity, it is
widely perceived as a way for the Western labor markets to respond successfully to
the claim for cheaper labor, which remains the major accelerator to increase
competitiveness and productivity.
18
Under the frame of constant debate over labor market flexibility (see for
example, Dearden 1999) and increasing demands for deregulation in the field of
employment relations, it is a prerequisite to analyze the ethical concepts applied in
dismissals decision making and process. According to Taru Vuontisjarvi, the
treatment of employees can be an indicative precondition regarding CSR at the sense
that, if a company doesnt assume a high level of responsibility to its employees, it is
unlikely to do so to its customers or to the social and natural environment in which it
works (Johnston, 2001).
The two major traditions which dominate current thinking in normative ethics
are deontology and utilitarianism. These traditions have been applied in attempts to
19
construct ethical models for managers and decision-makers, while the major elements
applicable in order to construct an ethical frame are presented, hereafter.
Kant holds that the fundamental principle of our moral duties is a categorical
imperative. It is an imperative because it is a command and it is summarized as one
ought never to act unless one is willing to have the maxim on which one acts to
become a universal law. More precisely, it commands us to exercise our wills in a
particular way, not to perform some action or other. It is categorical in virtue of
applying to us unconditionally, or simply because we possesses rational wills, without
reference to any ends that we might or might not have. The proper way to interpret the
universalizability formulation of the categorical imperative is that if the maxim for an
action is self-contradictory, then the action would be morally wrong. (Bowie, 1999)
According to this interpretation, it should be considered morally wrong, as being selfcontradictory that within all the Organizations employees may be dismissed,
irrespectively to their capabilities, motivation, expectations, or without previous
notice or reasonable justification for this action. Nevertheless, we notice that
categorical imperative cannot be applicable in every situation, especially when we
move from evaluating the actions or practices of an Organization to describing how
an Organization ought to interact with its stakeholders. Due to the fact that some
actions are of such nature that their maxim cannot even be thought as a universal law
of nature without contradiction. For this reason, our perception is that kantian ethics
should be perceived as a system of moral values. The principles of a moral
20
Organization, were coded by Norman Bowie (1999), they are briefly presented,
hereafter.
2. The Organization should have those affected by the Organizations rules and
policies participate in the determination of those rules and policies before they
are implemented.
3. It should not be the case that for all decisions, the interest of one stakeholder
takes priority.
4. When a situation arises where it appears that the humanity of one set of
stakeholders must be sacrificed for the humanity of another set of
21
stakeholders, that decision cannot be made on the grounds that there are a
greater number of stakeholders in one group than in another.
Kants principle finds motives for actions morally important, in that it expects
persons to make the right decisions for the right reasons. According to Kantian
thinking, if a corporation does the right thing only when (and for the reason that) it is
profitable or when it will enjoy good publicity, its decision is prudential, not moral. It
is worth-mentioning that Kant insisted that all persons must act not only in
accordance with obligation, but for the sake of obligation; that is, the persons motive
for action must be recognition of the duty to act.
22
23
4.2.Utilitarianism
On the contrary, utilitarian theories hold that the moral worth of actions or
practices is determined solely by their consequences. As summarized by Bowie and
Beauchamp, an action or practice appears to be right if it leads to best possible
balance between good consequences for all the parties affected. According to this
perspective, utilitarians believe that the purpose or function of morality is to promote
human welfare by minimizing harms and maximizing benefits. This teleological
ethical system focusing on net consequences, not individual intentions is termed
Utilitarianism, derived from the word "utility," which had an 18th century meaning
that referred to the degree of usefulness of a household object or a domestic animal;
that is, a horse could be said to have a "utility" for plowing beyond the cost of its
upkeep. "Utility" has this same meaning, and this same derivation, in microeconomic
theory; it measures our degree of preference for a given good or service relative to
price. In Utilitarian theory, it measures our perception of the net benefits and costs
associated with a given act. (Hosmer, 1987)
24
exclusively on judging the ethics of the action in terms of the results produced by the
action (in terms of the means vs. ends, it focuses exclusively on the ends, not the
means). It is worth-noticed that significant number of HRM practices and tools, such
as Management by Objectives, Risk Assessment or costs/benefits analysis, are often
justified as a means to improve organizational efficiency and maintain profitability,
according to the aforementioned utilitarian sense.
25
with the Stakeholders theory perspective in order to originate a wider framework for
dismissals decision making.
26
benefits for the great majority of the population by imposing sacrifices or penalties on
a small minority. This is a common justification for applying ad-hoc dismissals,
downsizing or even outsourcing of Functions. Utilitarianism fails because in reality it
involves two principles: greatest good and greatest number; at some point, in the
decision process on dismissals, these two principles come into conflict, and then one
has no single means of determining what is the "right" or "best" or "proper" act.
27
Given the fact that there is no any universally accepted, absolute statement of
what is and what is not ethical - but important and carefully reasoned traditions, our
aim is to combine the aforementioned elements and further develop an ethical
evaluation framework regarding the dismissal process, broader than the relevant legal
frame.
28
actions and decisions, deontology emphasizes on the principle that right decisions
should be made for the right reasons. Consequently, a dismissal is unfair, if it is not
conducted for a fair reason and in accordance with a fair procedure, even if it
complies with any prerequisite recorded in a contract of employment or in legislation
governing employment. Whether a dismissal is conducted for a fair reason, or not, is
determined by the facts of the specific case, and the appropriateness of dismissal as a
penalty for misconduct or solution for organizational restructuring or employee
incapacity.
29
If a dismissal is not automatically unfair, the employer must show that the
reason for dismissal is a reason related either to the employee's conduct or capacity,
either it is based on the operational requirements of the business. If the employer fails
to do that, or fails to prove that the dismissal was effected in accordance with a fair
procedure, the dismissal is unfair. The fact that, according to the Greek labor
legislation, termination of employment is permitted without the employer to be
obliged to justify his action or invoke some reason cannot be compliant with the
deontological ethical theory. Deontology requires right decisions for the right reasons,
while labor legislation diminishes the importance of invoking a reason for
employment termination and the consequences upon the dismissed employees. It is
worth-mentioning, though, that court decisions attempt to balance this legal
inadvertency , in order for the labor legislation to remain employee-protective,
despite the recent deregulations. According to recent court decisions, a dismissal is
30
automatically unfair, if the reason for the dismissal is one that amounts to an
infringement of the fundamental rights of employees and trade unions, which include
indicatively participation in a lawful strike, intended or actual pregnancy and acts of
discrimination.
31
certainty and consistency in the application of discipline. This requires that the
standards of conduct are clear and made available to employees in a manner that is
easily understood. This approach regards the purpose of discipline as a means for
employees to know and understand what standards are required of them. Efforts
should be made to correct employees' behavior through a system of disciplinary
measures such as counseling and warnings. Employees and, where appropriate, their
representatives should be involved in the development of rules and procedures. It is
also important for the HR Professionals to assist employees and managers in order to
understand what the rules and procedures are, and, how they are to be used.
32
33
`interpersonal relations with the Direct Manager. In those cases we may introduce a
rotation program in order to give the employee the alternative to work in a different
environment, develop her qualities and prevent termination of employment
34
observed in recent incidents, creating in this way a more protective frame for their
employees than the legal provisions; nevertheless, this legal deregulation is recent, so
it is not accurate to evaluate the effect of such a hostile measure for the employment
security on real business world. In any case, probation period is further determined
by the nature of the job, and the time it takes to determine the employee's suitability
for continued employment. When appropriate, an employer should give an employee
whatever evaluation, instruction, training, guidance or counseling the employee
requires rendering satisfactory service. Dismissal during the probationary period
should be preceded by an opportunity for the employee to state a case in response and
to be assisted by fellow employee or supervisor.
35
36
37
Despite the fact that in various countries the employer is not allowed to
dismiss an employee that performs in the average of the settled performance standards
constitutes a legal prerequisite for a dismissal to be considered fair; there are still
significant limitations in the Greek business practice and legislation. According to our
observation, the main reason is the fact that the needed HR tools are not developed in
the direction of individual rights protection. For the moment, HR Professionals are
expected to coordinate ad-hoc dismissals requests, while their involvement is limited
at the level of supporting the Direct Manager to conduct a legally compliant dismissal
without affecting the Organizations performance.
In terms of practicality, the employee who has been ranked below average
during the performance appraisal process should know that his performance is
unsatisfactory and corrective measures should be taken. Given this acknowledgement,
the employee himself has the opportunity to control the next steps of the performance
management process, before the dismissal decision making, by requesting any
additional support from the Organization in order to meet the organizational
expectations. Furthermore, the performance appraisal in those cases may have the
same impact on the process, as a written notification.
The fact that the HR Professionals still hold a coordinator role, does not mean
that they do not have the responsibility of identifying weaknesses and consulting the
Direct Managers in order for them to take any corrective actions (such as internal
transfers, training programs, etc) before the dismissal decision making. From the HR
Professionals perspective, poor performers should be considered as important, as
high-performers, in terms of performance management practices in order to prevent
38
39
Conduct of Employee
Performance of Employee
40
beginning of this paper, the legal frame sets nothing but the minimum level of
employees rights protection, while as previously discussed there is a significant
number of legal provisions that do not even comply with morality, neither in the
deontological nor, at least, in the utilitarian approach.
41
Process Of Dismissal
Ad Hoc Dismissals
Employers and employees should raise and deal with issues promptly and should not
unreasonably delay meetings, decisions or confirmation of those decisions
Employers and employees should act consistently
Employers should carry out any necessary investigations to establish the facts of the case
Employers should inform employees of the basis of the problem and give them
an opportunity to put their case in response before any decisions are made
Employers should allow an employee to appeal against any formal decision made
42
decision, and, preferably, furnish the employee with written notification of that
decision.
Mutual Communication
Direct Managers are the ones responsible to conduct these meetings, while
HR Professionals should coordinate this process, provide feedback and advise the
decision maker on the discussed issues. The meeting with the Direct Manager and the
HR Professional should have the form of an informal interview conducted in order to
assure that the employee acknowledges the situation and give him the opportunity to
state a case in response to the allegations, as well as, observe her motivations.
Following the meeting, the Direct Manager needs to decide whether or not the
action of dismissal or any potential disciplinary action is justified; in the latter case
she should inform the employee, accordingly, in writing. Where misconduct is
confirmed or the employee is found to be performing unsatisfactorily it should be
usual to give the employee a written warning, as discussed the performance appraisal
document may be also considered as written notification. A further act of misconduct
or failure to improve performance within a set period would normally result in a final
written warning. Despite the fact that, according to our observation, misconduct is not
the most common reason for dismissal, comparing with organizational needs or
employees incapacity, we need to highlight that it is the most sensitive cases from the
HR Professionals to handle.
43
For this reason, we would like to underline that, in case of an employees first
sufficiently serious misconduct, it may be appropriate to move directly to a final
written warning. This might occur where the employees actions have had, or are
liable to have, a serious or harmful impact on the organisation. A first or final written
warning should set out the nature of the misconduct or poor performance and the
change in behaviour or improvement in performance required (with timescale). The
employee should be told how long the warning will remain current. The employee
should be informed of the consequences of further misconduct, or failure to improve
performance, within the set period following a final warning. For instance that it may
result in dismissal or some other contractual penalty such as demotion or loss of
seniority.
Given that the Organization follows the aforementioned procedure, it gives the
opportunity to the employee to participate in the decision-making process, to
acknowledge her weaknesses and the Organizations expectations, and therefore, to be
aligned with one of the major principles of the kantian perspective for morality.
Nevertheless, Organizations appear reluctant to adopt procedures that require bottom
up employees involvement or even to inform them officially about misconduct
issues. According to our observation, in cases of misconduct the direct manager is
used to commenting on the employees behaviour, but not in the aforementioned
officially interactive way, due to the fact that he does not want to cause any
confrontation. In several cases this reaction does not allow the employee to identify
the impact of the misconduct and, consequently, to adopt any development or
corrective actions.
44
45
46
Meanwhile, with the term redundancy we define dismissals for a reason not
related to the dismissed employee or for a number of reasons all of which are not so
related. This definition might include, for example, a situation where dismissals are
not related to the conduct or capability of the individuals but are part of an
Organisational restructuring.
Risk Shifting
47
business environment has been to substantially shift economic, financial and social
risks from businesses and government to the individual. (Rafferty & Yu, 2010) This
fact is evident on the impact of the afore-presented legal deregulations related with
ad-hoc redundancies policies, as well as collective dismissals. In the present study,
hereafter, we emphasize on the actions that HR Professionals may undertake in order
to balance the risk shifting by establishing ad-hoc redundancies avoidance practices,
decision making criteria and ethical conduct elements.
employment )
Diagram 4: Corrective Actions and Selection Criteria prior to Decision for Ad-hoc
Redundancies
48
HR planning
Organizations are responsible for deciding the size and most efficient use of
the workforce. Effective human resource planning can help to determine existing and
future staffing needs. In turn this can lead to an improvement in job security for
employees and to the avoidance of short-term solutions which are inconsistent with
longer-term needs. The HR Professionals are expected to act as Business Partners in
order to identify those organizational needs, both short-term and long-term and
contribute to the most efficient workforce allocation in order to eliminate any
potential need for redundancies. Meanwhile, any potential recruiting needs should be
carefully evaluated, while internal recruitment processes, as the part of a broader
human resources management system, should be adopted in order for an Organization
to avoid overstaffing and, consequently, to minimize the potential uncertainty about
future employment.
49
manpower
allocation
and
alternative
methods
of
Organizational
Restructuring are critical elements in order to avoid redundancies and build ethical
Organizations. Internal Transfer programs and Job Redesign are HR tools that can
substantially contribute to this direction.
50
Nevertheless, it is worth mentioning that it is not meant that all measures for
minimizing or avoiding compulsory redundancies may be compliant with the ethical
51
standards of the deontological theory. There are specific cases, where Organizations
introduce short-term working and temporary layoffs. These practices are related
mostly to the risk shifting practices discussed in the previous paragraph, rather than to
an ethical deontological approach of treating employees as ends and not as means
only. For this reason, we suggest that such practices should be further avoided, while
restrictions on recruitment, retraining and redeployment to other parts of the
organization, reduction or elimination of overtime, seeking applicants for early
retirement, or voluntary redundancy are ethically acceptable practices observed in real
business world.
52
53
Right to appeal
54
In order to assure that the risk will not be shifted to the employees, the most
important element is to preserve the employees individual right to work in the sense
that a suitable alternative work should be provided through an outplacement program.
No other benefit could be considered as important as outplacement service for a laid
off employee, in order to eliminate moral and financial impact and retain their sense
of dignity.
Process Of Redundancies
Ad Hoc Dismissals
Employers ought to establish and communicate a formal redundancy policy that clearly
states the selection criteria, as well as severance terms details, appeal procedure and displaced
employees benefits package
Employers and employees should act consistently
Employers should proceed with internal restructuring and rationalization of alternative costs,
before they proceed with redundancies.
Employers should inform employees of the basis of the problem and give them
an opportunity to put any alternative in response before any decisions are made
Employers should consider the objective criteria during decision making
Employers should allow an employee to appeal against any formal decision made
Employers should provide financial aid, training or outplacement services to the displaced
employees, in order to assure that their individual rights are not violated during this process.
NDANCY HANDLING
55
6.
In fact, the presented form involves a Questionnaire that both Direct Managers
and HR Professionals need to fill in order to assure that basic fair process elements
and decision making tools have been taken into consideration. ereafter, we applied
the proposed Termination of Employment Request form in the real business world,
56
in order to assess any potential weaknesses and its outcome compared to the initially
followed process.
The recruitment process for the specific position was internally coordinated
and the HR Department had assessed various candidates, before MK. MK seemed to
be a promising candidate, as he was, also, recommended by a Senior Manager of the
Organization. Nevertheless, in fact he was not mature enough to undertake such a
57
senior role; for this reason, the HR Professional suggested to conduct a three-month
short-term contract, which will be turned into indefinite time under the condition of
satisfactory performance. Indeed, MK was hired in the position of Group Solutions
Manager with a three-month short-term contract. During the first months of
employment, this lack of meeting expectations was obvious, while he was struggling
to deal with demanding tasks and coordinate efficiently his responsibilities.
It was commonly accepted that he could not deliver the required results and it
was more than clear to everyone that the job role was far too senior compared to MK
s skills. Given that this sense was clear also to the Human Resources Department, the
HR Professional consulted his Direct Manager to renew MK s contract for another
six months, instead of turning it into indefinite time, in order to, further, notify MK
that the performance standards have not been met, so corrective actions should be
made. Nevertheless, the Direct Manager considered more appropriate to renew the
contract for indefinite time, which according to the effective legislation meant that, he
would have the right to dismiss him at any time with no need for justification. Indeed,
this fact does not justify an ethical motive for action and raises further ethical issues
related with decision makers moral principles. Furthermore, the fact that there was
no official discussion with MK about the raised performance issues, but only informal
recommendations and comments from the Direct Manager, did not highlight the
impact of this weakness for the continuity of the employment relation. Given the fact
that MK was notified that his contract was renewed for indefinite time, he considered
that he successfully meets expectations and any potential conflict between him and his
Manager was not related to objective criteria.
58
During this period there was an organizational restructuring that lead to the
separation of the Sales force from the Product Specialist department, this consequent
to the establishment of a Group Solutions Manager role with broader responsibilities
and different direct report. Under these circumstances, MK incapacity to respond to
the required performance standards led his Manager to dismiss him without previous
discussion or notification.
59
The Direct Manager and HR Professional have had to conduct a meeting with
MK, which ideally, should have been taken place during the discussion for the
renewal of his contract and his mid-term performance appraisal. Given that the
meeting takes place, at least during the decision making process for his dismissal, MK
should have been, officially, notified for the lack of performance in order to suggest
any corrective actions. The HR Professionals contribution is critical in order to
coordinate a potential internal transfer process in order to cover a position that suits
MKs skills.
In that time, there was a vacancy of an Account Manager position that fit
MKs profile and background. Nevertheless, the decision for dismissing MK was just
announced to the HR Professional, without involving her or MK in the decision
making process, or even giving him the chance to take any corrective actions. This
fact deprived MK from the alternative of being internally transferred in a different
position within the same Organization, that may have been proven himself successful
performer.
60
7. Conclusion
The proposed model demands that the HR Professionals will undertake a more
active and strategic role, acting as Business Partners in order to identify weaknesses
and take the necessary actions to ensure ethical conduct during the dismissal decision
making and process. Nevertheless, there are several restructures that need to occur in
order for this model to be applicable in contemporary Organizations: the way that HR
Professionals perceive their role in Organizations, as well as, their commitment to act
as Ethics Agents and contribute both for Management and employees.
61
References
ACAS. (2009, April). Disciplinary and grievance procedures . UK: The Stationery
Office.
Beauchamp, Tom L. and Bowie, N.E. (1979), Ethical Theory and Business (PrenticeHall,
Englewood ClifFs)
62
Kujala, J. (2004). Managers moral perceptions: change in Finland during the 1990's.
Business Ethics: A European Review , 143-165.
Lamsa, A. (2001). Downsizing and Ethics of Personnel Dismissals - The Case of
Finnish Managers. Journal of Business Ethics .
Michel, F. (2009). A Stakeholder's perspective on Human Resources Management.
Journal Business Ethics
Mitchell, R., B. Agle and D. Wood (1997) Toward a Theory of Stakeholder.
Identification and Salience: Defining the Principle of Who and What Really Counts,
Academy of Management Review 22(4), 853886.
63
Rafferty, M., & Yu, S. (2010). Shifting Risk: Work and Worklife in Australia. A report
for the Australian Council of Trade Unions. Sydney: Workplace Research Centre.
Ross, David: 1961, The Right and The Good (London).
Rousseau, D. M. (1999). The problem of the psychological contract considered.
Journal of Organizational Behaviour .
Schoemaker, M., Nijhof, A., & Jonker, J. (2006). Human Value Management: The
influence of the Contemporary Developments of Corporate Social Responsibility and
Social Capital on HRM. Management Review .
Trevino, Linda (1986). 'Ethical Decision-Making in Organizations: A PersonSituation Interactionist Model', Academy of Management Review 11(3), 601-617.
Velasquez, Manuel G. (1988) Business Ethics. Concepts and Cases. Second Edition
(Prentice-Hall, Engiewood Cliffs)
Vuontisjarvi, T. (2006). The European context for corporate social responsibility and
human resource management: an analysis of the largest Finnish companies. Business
Ethics: A European Review .
Weber, M.: 1971, Le savant et le politique, Edition Plon.
64