ABC Manufacturing Company

The ABC Manufacturing Company is a steel working plant under the path of a plant manager who is called a strict disciplinarian. One day a foreman noticed Bhola, one of the staff, at the time-clock punching out two cards his own and the card of Nathu, a fellow employee. Since it was the rule of the corporate that each man should punch out his personal card, the foreman asked Bhola to accompany him to the Personnel Director, who interpreted the incident as a direct violation of a rule and gave quick notice of discharge to each workers.

Don’t waste time Get a verified expert to help you with Essay

The two employees got here to see the Personnel Director on the next day. Nathu claimed innocence on the bottom that he had not asked for his card to be punched and didn’t know at the time that it was being punched. He had been supplied a experience by a pal who had already punched out and who could not wait for him to go through the punch-out process.

Nathu was worried about his spouse who was sick at home and was anxious to succeed in residence as rapidly as possible. He planned to take his card to the foreman the following morning for reinstatement, a provision sometimes exercised in such instances.

These circumstances had been verified by Bhola. He claimed that he had punched Nathu’s card the same time he punched his own, not being aware of any wrongdoing. The Personnel Director was inclined to believe the story of the two males but did not feel he could reverse the action taken.

He acknowledged that these men had been good workers and had good data previous to this incident. Nevertheless, that they had violated a rule for which the penalty was immediate discharge. He also reminded them that it was the policy of the company to enforce the principles without exception.

A few days later the Personnel Director, the Plant Manager, and the Sales Manager sat together at lunch. The Sales Manager reported that he was faced with the need of notifying one of their finest customers that his order must be delayed because of the liability of one department to evolve to schedule. The division in query was the one from which the two employees had been discharged. Not solely had it been inconceivable to exchange these males to date, but disgruntlement over the incident had led to significant decline in the cooperation of the opposite employees.

The Personnel Director and the Sales Manager took the position that the discha rge of those two valuable males might have been prevented if there had been provision for onsidering the circumstances of the case. They pointed out that the incident was expensive to the corporate within the possible loss of a buyer, within the dissatisfaction inside the employee group, and within the time and money that may be concerned in recruiting and training replacements.

The Plant Manager couldn’t agree with this point of view. “We must have rules if we are to have efficiency; and the principles aren’t any god unless we enforce them. Furthermore, if we start thinking about all these variations in circumstances, we will find ourselves loaded down with everyone pondering he’s an exception. ” He admitted that the grievances had been frequent however countered with the purpose that they could probably be of little consequence if the contract agreed to by the union was followed to the letter

Written by Essay Examples

Aaron Beck – The father of cognitive therapy

Abortion as an Ethical Issue