Re: ethics [formerly " interview and..."]

Subject: Re: ethics [formerly " interview and..."]
From: Michele Davis <michele -at- krautgrrl -dot- com>
To: TECHWR-L <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 14:35:21 -0500

My two cents on the ethical debate given the below reference is that a friend of mine is a lawyer, she is asked to throw out work she's done for a client so the Associate she works for can bill more, later on. Her specific Associate who runs his own fiefdom is clear that he doesn't want perfect work, because if they deliver perfect work then the client won't came back, and if they don't come back then the fiefdom cannot continue to reap in the money.

He doesn't have a code of ethics spelled out, but this would certainly fall into "ethics" because ethics can mean:

The study of the general nature of morals and of the specific moral choices to be made by a person; moral philosophy.

Michele

Gresham, Kathleen 000 wrote:

In the case of business, there really are not any business morals. There are,
however, ethics. But in order for something to be "unethical" there has to be a
clear statement of what IS ethical. While we may all agree that lying to
employees is wrong, it is not, by definition, unethical. Therefore, before you
fire up the rage against the machine soapbox rants, just keep in mind that just
because something bothers you or offends your morality, doesn't mean its
illegal or unethical.








References:
RE: ethics [formerly " interview and..."]: From: Gresham, Kathleen 000

Previous by Author: Re: Projects available are getting shorter and shorter
Next by Author: Re: extra words: unnecessary or educational?
Previous by Thread: RE: ethics [formerly " interview and..."]
Next by Thread: RE: ethics [formerly " interview and..."]


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:


Sponsored Ads