The SHRM Code of Ethics includes six major components that address different issues relating to proper conduct in an organization. In the given scenario, the particular employee that issued the derogative remarks did not comply with the Professional responsibility aspect of SHRM. This aspect emphasizes the importance of value addition to the organization through fulfilling the individual ethical standards. The employee was not responsible in their conduct and decision-making even though they were practicing their freedom of expression. Individuals should always be accountable for their actions and recognize the implications of those actions on the organization and other individuals.
Ethical leadership is another aspect of SHRM that applies to the scenario. The supervisor exhibits ethical leadership by showing concern about the implications of the conduct of the employee. Leaders in an organization should set the highest possible standards to be followed by their colleagues. One ethical leadership guideline stipulates that leaders need to question individuals' actions to maintain ethical standards (Shrm, 2018). The supervisor's action of seeking guidance from the HR manager demonstrates adherence to this aspect of SHRM. These actions should be reinforced through mentorship and training others on ethical decision-making. Good leaders should always act by example in maintain high ethical standards and empower others to embrace ethical conduct and responsibility.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The fairness and justice principle is another aspect of the SHRM Code of Ethics that directly applies to the outlined scenario. This principle primarily guides the actions of human resource personnel in an organization. It emphasizes fairness and justice in handling issues that affect other employees of the organization. The HR manager to whom the supervisor reported the case needs to act to promote fairness. Justice should be served that the employee who was targeted by the derogatory remarks becomes satisfied by the process and final verdict, and the one who issued the remarks takes responsibility for the actions. The HR process's outcome should aim to improve and sustain the organization's ethical standards that accommodate everybody.
The use of information as an aspect of the SHRM Code of Ethics is the final element that plies to the scenario. Communication within the organization should be truthful, professional and protects the rights of employees. All employees must investigate the information for accuracy before disseminating it on any platform within the organization and externally (Shrm, 2018). The employee who made derogative statements about their colleague did not adhere to this principle. Besides demeaning their colleague's dignity, they also caused damage to the organization's reputation. They were not responsible enough for the decision, actions that contravene ethical principles governing conduct in an organization.
In the scenario, the legal process to determine facts should be conducted by the HR manager alongside other parties in the organization. Organizational policy and general workplace principles forbid actions and speech that may cause physical, emotional, and reputational damage to another individual (Scott, 2016). The organization also aims to safeguard the privacy and dignity of all people within its environment and externally. Based on these two principles, it should be determined that the employee acted against the organization's policies regarding individual rights. The state law also forbids any speech that incites discrimination or violence against a particular person based on race, religion, disability, or sexual orientation (Morgan & David, 2013). The management of the organization must uphold these fundamental laws of the state within its operations. The human resource manager is the custodian of individual rights within the organization's setting (Scott, 2016). They should arbitrate any conflicts that arise in regards to violation of the policies. They should also recommend the top management on a possible penalty to the individual and compensation to the aggrieved parties.
The employee's other malpractice was to issue derogative statements that could damage the organization's public image. This offense is different from the one that targets a specific individual since it contravenes the agreement between the individual and the organization. An employee for the organization should not engage in actions or speech that directly damages its reputation and objectives (Meglich, 2017). Someone committing such an action will be determined to have breached the terms of the employment contract, which will make them liable to any disciplinary measures, including termination. This process will be determined by the organization's management, responsible for hiring and terminating employees when it is suitable for the organization's interest.
The affected parties in this proceeding will be the victim of the harmful remarks and the perpetrator of these statements. The victim will likely suffer psychological harm since the statements demeaned their dignity. The organization should compensate this individual and apply any measures to reverse the damages caused to them. The perpetrator will also be affected since they are likely to be subjected to disciplinary actions as recommended by the Human resource manager. This individual should be sensitized to the need for professionalism and ethics within the organization. Other employees will also be affected since those negative remarks also indirectly diminished all employees' dignity and value. Statements posted on social media damage the reputation of the organization and its employees to some degree.
The human resource should be the immediate person involved in the resolutions by issuing disciplinary measures to the offender. They should also make arrangements for the training of ethical principles within the organization. Top management like the CEO will also be involved, especially in deciding whether to terminate the offender's contract or retain them. Lastly, all employees will also be involved in complying with recommendations that will be made from these proceedings (Morgan & David, 2013).
The offender is likely to be subjected to disciplinary action that includes suspension from work since the offense was significant. This penalty involves laying off the employee for some time between one day and some months. During this period, the pay for the employee will be decreased to subsistence allowance. The suspension penalty intends to give the employee a period to review their actions' ramifications and correct themselves (Onyango, 2017). Another penalty that the employee could face is a demotion from a particular position to a lower as an alternative to suspension, denying the organization's services. Demotion will impact the employee psychologically and is meant to develop remorse for their actions. Dismissal is also a penalty that can be taken as the ultimate punishment for a primary offense that seriously damages its operations.
The HR manager should recommend and spearhead training of all employees on ethical practices within an organization. This training should focus on equality, ethics, and professionalism as essential pillars for everyone's conducive environment. Policies on sending information about the organization or its employees on social media should be revised. The HR manager should commend the supervisor on their proper utilization of the leadership role in ensuring concerns that affect employees' rights are addressed. They should also be advised to mentor other employees to always take personal responsibility for their actions and decisions to maintain high ethical standards.
References
Meglich, P. (2017). Virtue Ethics in Employee Relations. International Handbooks in Business Ethics , 1207–1215. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6510-8_72
Morgan, H. A., & David, F. A. (2013). Social Media and Employment Law Summary of Key Cases and Legal Issues. Paul Hastings LLP .
Onyango, G. (2017). Organizational Disciplinary Actions as Socio-Political Processes in Public Organizations. Public Organization Review , 19 (2), 227–248. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11115-017-0401-7
Scott, E. (2016). Ethics and Human Resource Management. Practicing Professional Ethics in Economics and Public Policy , 215–221. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-7306-5_11
Shrm. (2018, May 3). Code of Ethics . SHRM. https://www.shrm.org/about-shrm/pages/code-of-ethics.aspx.
