Terrell G. Manyak, Ph.D.          Nova Southeastern UniversityHuizenga School of Business and Entrepreneurship
   Ethics by policy:    ◦ In situation X do Y   Ethics by moral code    ◦ Do unto others…; Always tell the truth   Mora...
“Most of you are probably aware that our companyis starting to receive interrogatories from the EEOCthat question our pers...
   What was our perception of reality?   EEOC was targeting key companies to set an    example   We were a political ta...
   Lawyers would handle adverse treatment    complaints   HR would handle adverse impact complaints    ◦ A game of perce...
   Measured reading, writing, and arithmetic    ◦ How many dimes are in 80 cents?   Claimed systematic discrimination si...
   Told the boss that our results over 15 years    showed clear adverse impact   Boss replied: Don’t we have a 10 year d...
   The company statistics for the last 10 years    met the 80% standard   The current test is still being analyzed   Th...
   Employed 1,000 security guards   Lieutenant claimed systematic discrimination    against Jews for 10 years.   Forbid...
   Results looked very bad   Security force was dominated by Irish    Catholics   The boss reviewed the list    ◦ How d...
   Collected 10 years of data on every personnel    transaction involving security officers   Couldn’t analyze because o...
   HR knew there was systematic discrimination.   What are we going to do for the lieutenant?   Nothing   To do anythi...
Attack             DefendCompany   Lieutenant   EEOC
   Two years of success against EEOC claims   EEOC lawyer to be replaced   We can’t lose this guy!!!   Washington offi...
   I enjoyed the power and rewards   Did I cross an ethical line?    ◦ I never did lie    ◦ Should I have told the whole...
   Separate ethics from life    ◦ Do what the boss tells you to do. It’s his problem.    ◦ Can you escape ethical respons...
   What if the EEOC was actually behaving solely    to achieve political objectives?    ◦ Would I have been justified in ...
   HR never attempted to correct problems of    discrimination   HR’s only objective was beating the EEOC   Realization...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

You Don’t Have to Tell the Truth; You Are Only Obligated Not to Lie - Terrell Manyak, Nova Southeastern University

1,412 views
1,224 views

Published on

Terrell Manyak, Nova Southeastern University, Speaker at the marcus evans HR Summit Fall 2011, delivers her presentation entitled You Don’t Have to Tell the Truth; You Are Only Obligated Not to Lie

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,412
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
5
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

You Don’t Have to Tell the Truth; You Are Only Obligated Not to Lie - Terrell Manyak, Nova Southeastern University

  1. 1. Terrell G. Manyak, Ph.D. Nova Southeastern UniversityHuizenga School of Business and Entrepreneurship
  2. 2.  Ethics by policy: ◦ In situation X do Y Ethics by moral code ◦ Do unto others…; Always tell the truth Moral dilemma ◦ What we ought to do ◦ What we can do ◦ Situation is more complex Let me tell you a story
  3. 3. “Most of you are probably aware that our companyis starting to receive interrogatories from the EEOCthat question our personnel actions with respect tominorities and women. I see these interrogatoriesas just the beginning. The EEOC is out to get us.Well, that’s just not going to happen. We are notgoing to lie down and let them run all over us. Toprotect the company, I am creating a special taskforce to work with the law department. You will beresponsible for responding to each of thesecomplaints as they come it. As of this time, youwill set aside your other duties whenever necessaryto focus on answering these interrogatories. Isthat understood! We are not going to lose!”
  4. 4.  What was our perception of reality? EEOC was targeting key companies to set an example We were a political target Actively getting our employees to file complaints
  5. 5.  Lawyers would handle adverse treatment complaints HR would handle adverse impact complaints ◦ A game of percentages ◦ Needed quick responses to interrogatories First taste of power ◦ They needed me ◦ I knew how to access the computer records ◦ I know something about statistics
  6. 6.  Measured reading, writing, and arithmetic ◦ How many dimes are in 80 cents? Claimed systematic discrimination since first used 15 years ago Statistics showed ◦ First 5 years were very bad ◦ Last 10 years were OK ◦ Last test was bad
  7. 7.  Told the boss that our results over 15 years showed clear adverse impact Boss replied: Don’t we have a 10 year data retention rule? What are you doing with 15 years of data? The early data mysteriously disappeared
  8. 8.  The company statistics for the last 10 years met the 80% standard The current test is still being analyzed The MLBS test was clearly acceptable Hmmm ◦ Did I lie? No, all the facts provided were correct ◦ Did I tell the truth? It’s the EEOC’s responsibility to find the truth ◦ Did I act ethically? You decide
  9. 9.  Employed 1,000 security guards Lieutenant claimed systematic discrimination against Jews for 10 years. Forbidden by keep religious information Told to see Captain O’Connor ◦ Mentally damaged ◦ Hidden to protect him from HR ◦ His job was to keep personal records on index cards ◦ Sworn to secrecy
  10. 10.  Results looked very bad Security force was dominated by Irish Catholics The boss reviewed the list ◦ How do you know Sgt. Weiss is Jewish? ◦ I shrugged to protect the captain ◦ Boss: “If he wasn’t promoted, he must not be Jewish” and changed the person’s religious designation The results were still bad
  11. 11.  Collected 10 years of data on every personnel transaction involving security officers Couldn’t analyze because of time restriction in the interrogatory EEOC was free to scrutinize the mountain of data for discrimination. Did we lie? No, all facts were provided Did we tell the truth? It was there to be found Did we act ethically? Not our job to prove anything
  12. 12.  HR knew there was systematic discrimination. What are we going to do for the lieutenant? Nothing To do anything would admit guilt EEOC doesn’t care about him either Battle of institutional power ◦ EEOC seeks political power ◦ Company has right to defend itself ◦ Worry about the lieutenant later
  13. 13. Attack DefendCompany Lieutenant EEOC
  14. 14.  Two years of success against EEOC claims EEOC lawyer to be replaced We can’t lose this guy!!! Washington official came for a visit Boss took him to play golf, complained bitterly about lawyer being to tough Threw a case agreeing to hire female security officers Official convinced lawyer was a tiger Did we lie? Did we tell the truth? Were we ethical?
  15. 15.  I enjoyed the power and rewards Did I cross an ethical line? ◦ I never did lie ◦ Should I have told the whole truth? Lawyers are not required to tell the whole truth, just not lie Did the EEOC’s political motivation move the ethical line? What would have happened if something went wrong? Boss never put anything in writing
  16. 16.  Separate ethics from life ◦ Do what the boss tells you to do. It’s his problem. ◦ Can you escape ethical responsibility? Ethical righteousness ◦ What you did was simply wrong! ◦ Personal morality may be overriding the need to protect the organization Avoid the ethical dilemma ◦ If it’s legal, who cares? That’s business ◦ Situation may be legally right but morally wrong
  17. 17.  What if the EEOC was actually behaving solely to achieve political objectives? ◦ Would I have been justified in moving my ethical line to defend the company? What if the EEOC was correct in its actions against the company? ◦ Would I have been motivated to become a whistleblower to the EEOC?
  18. 18.  HR never attempted to correct problems of discrimination HR’s only objective was beating the EEOC Realization was a major source of stress ◦ Joined with others to overthrow management ◦ Worked with NY Times to uncover corruption ◦ Political forces stopped revolt ◦ Only choice was to leave the organization BUT, an ethical line was crossed I’m no longer innocent

×