3. 1.SHOULD FRED BE REINSTATED?
Yes, Fred should be given another chance. Everybody needs to
be given a second chance, and I think Fred should should be
given one, especially since he had gone through a rehabilitation
problem and his treatment counselor's letter said that Fred's
prognosis indicated a clean and sober lifestyle.
Having said that, if Fred repeats his poor attendance and job
performance issues, he should be permanently relieved of his
duties without any scope for re in station in the future.
4. 2.WAS THE COMPANY FAIR TO FRED IN
HELPING HIM RECEIVE TREATMENT?
Yes, I think the company was more than fair to
Fred in helping him receive treatment.
5. 3.DID THE PERSONNEL DIRECTOR BEHAVE
ETHICALLY TOWARD FRED?
In fact, I thought the personnel director went out of his
way and helped Fred receive treatment.
The personnel director behaved very ethically toward
Fred by approving his unemployment insurance claim,
which allowed him to continue receiving insurance
benefits even after getting formally discharged from his
duties.
6. 4.DID FRED ACT ETHICALLY FOR HIS
COMPANY?
YES, he acted ethically for his company.
While I think that the personnel director behaved very
ethically toward Fred, I still think he acted unethically
toward the company by approving Fred's unemployment
insurance claim.
The personnel director's act was unethical toward the
company, especially when you consider the fact that the
company did not have any employee assistance program
in place and that Fred did not inform the company about
his drug problem earlier.
7. 5.WOULD IT BE FAIR TO OTHER
EMPLOYEES TO REINSTATE FRED?
It would not be fair to other employees to r
einstate FRED.
I don't think Fred should be given any special
consideration, or be treated by Sam's Saunas in a
different way when compared to the way it treats
other employees. Sam's Saunas should treat Fred
in the same way as it would treat any other
employee who has supposedly recovered from.