McDonald’s is in the news
again, and this time their food is not under scrutiny. The worldwide company is
coming under fire amidst a lawsuit filed this week by 10 ex-employees in Virginia,
claiming they were victims of sexual and racial discrimination. This discrimination
caused them to be terminated from their positions at McDonald's owned by franchisee Michael Simon. There
are multiple ethical issues to be considered here. The issues of racism, sexual
harassment, as well as the issue of at-will employment states and the issue of
the viability of McDonalds Corporate being held responsible for the actions
taken by supervisors at restaurants operated under a private franchisee.
In
regards to the issue of racism and sexual harassment, these are moral issues.
However, morals and ethics are commonly becoming interchangeable in today’s
society. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits
discrimination based on an individual’s race, color, religion, sex, or national
origin, this encompasses racism and sexual harassment. Ethical Theory and Business teaches us that these types of
discrimination fall under the category of applied ethics. Racial and sexual discrimination
are unethical, and a violation of human rights, however there are proper
procedures to take when feeling discriminated against. Employers are responsible
for creating a safe work environment for their employees. Ethical
Theory and Business shows us that
employees cannot disobey orders or walk out in order to avoid discrimination.
Employees must file complaints through the proper channels, via their
supervisor, their supervisor’s boss, human resources, or corporate human
resources. In this case the employees state they contacted corporate and no
action was taken, at that time they filed the law suit against McDonalds. Beyond Integrity – a Judeo Christian Approach
to Business Ethics reminds us that we should respect human dignity, this
includes the presence of a discrimination free workplace.
The
state of Virginia is an at-will employment state, meaning an employer does not
have to provide a valid reason for the dismissal of an employee, and an
employee does not have to provide reasoning for leaving their position. Is this
ethical? Scholar Richard A. Epstien, promotes the tradition as being fair and
efficient, as discussed in Ethical Theory
and Business. I would agree with this school of thought as there are initiatives
in place to protect employees against wrongful termination. Wrongful
termination restrictions vary state to state, however federally employees are
protected from being terminated due to their race or their unwillingness to participate
in sexual advances from their supervisor or boss.
Based
on the lessons presented in the texts mentioned above, it would appear that McDonald’s
Corporate has not acted in an ethical fashion. (Contingent upon the validity of
the allegations in the case). The corporation promotes diversity and a safe
work environment. Although the locations in question are franchised owned, the amount
of control the corporation holds over franchise holders requires them to have a
stake in the wrong doings of their employees. For corporate to have been
notified by the employees that they had been subject to unethical practices and
to have not acted upon the allegations, with an investigation allows for a
valid law suit. McDonalds has a published Whistleblower policy, allowing for
employees to notify of any discriminatory or unethical behavior, without fear
or retribution. It is my belief that if the allegations are found to be
legitimate, McDonalds should be required to provide the dismissed employees
with monetary damages in the amount of the lost wages incurred, and they should
be reinstated to their positions in McDonald’s restaurants, not owned by the
franchisee in the case.
No comments:
Post a Comment