Question 1

As outlined by John Boatright in "Occupational Health and Safety", in the Whirlpool case the Supreme Court ruled that employees are justified in their refusal to work and need not request an OSHA inspection in the case of "imminent danger".

Accepted Answer

The statement is true. The Whirlpool case established that employees have the right to refuse to work if they believe there is an imminent danger, and they are not required to request an OSHA inspection beforehand.

Question 2

In "Occupational Health and Safety", John Boatright states that in today's work environment, the majority of occupational health problems are the result of routine, long-term exposure to hazardous substances.

Accepted Answer

John Boatright states that in today's work environment, the majority of occupational health problems are the result of routine, long-term exposure to hazardous substances.

Question 3

According to Patricia H. Werhane and Tara J. Radin in "Employment at Will and Due Process" which of these is not a justification of EAW

Accepted Answer

In "Employment at Will and Due Process," Werhane and Radin state that contracts should not be granted solely as a reward for achieving positions of greater respect and authority, as this can lead to abuse of power by employers. The other three options are presented as justifications of EAW.

Question 4

In "Whistle-Blowing, Moral Integrity, and Organizational Ethics," Brenkert puts the responsibility for creating an ethical environment and one that support whistle- blowing primarily on our social and political systems rather than individual organizations.

Accepted Answer

Brenkert argues that while broader social and political systems play a role, the primary responsibility for creating an ethical environment that supports whistle-blowing lies within individual organizations themselves. He emphasizes the importance of organizational policies, culture, and leadership in fostering an environment where ethical concerns can be raised internally.

Question 5

T of F: Under the Principle of Positional Responsibility, the more the organization undercuts a whistle-blower's attempt at reporting a wrongdoing, the weaker that employee's responsibilities to the company become.

Accepted Answer

The Principle of Positional Responsibility suggests that an employee's duty to their organization is contingent upon the organization's ethical conduct and support for the employee's adherence to ethical standards. If an organization undermines a whistleblower's efforts to report wrongdoing, it is failing to uphold ethical standards, thereby diminishing the employee's obligations to the company.

Question 6

According to Ronald Duska in "Whistle-Blowing and Employee Loyalty" we cannot have loyalty to any groups.

Accepted Answer

Ronald Duska argues that loyalty is primarily a concept that applies to individuals, not to corporations or groups, because these entities lack the capacity for mutual understanding and emotional bonds that underpin genuine loyalty. However, he does not claim that we cannot have loyalty to any groups; rather, he questions the nature and obligations of loyalty to impersonal organizations.

Question 7

While private sector employees often fall in the category of "at-will" employees, public sector employees have many more protections against demotions, transfers, or terminations.

Accepted Answer

Public sector employees typically have more job security due to their contracts or union agreements, which often include provisions for due process and grievance procedures in case of demotions, transfers, or terminations. In contrast, private sector employees are generally considered "at-will" employees, which means they can be terminated at any time for any reason that is not illegal.

Question 8

As told by Brenkert in "Whistle-blowing, Moral Integrity, and Organizational Ethics," the Principle of Positional Responsibility states that employees of a company have a special responsibility due to their circumstances that merits legitimizing whistle- blowing

Accepted Answer

Brenkert argues that employees who hold a certain position within a company have a higher level of responsibility, and thus, have the legitimacy to blow the whistle on any unethical or illegal behavior within the organization. This concept is known as the Principle of Positional Responsibility.

Question 9

According to Ruth R. Faden and Tom L. Beauchamp in "The Right to Risk Information and the Right to Refuse Workplace Hazards" OSHA's oversight of workplace safety sufficiently protects workers' rights.

Accepted Answer

Faden and Beauchamp argue that while OSHA's oversight is important, it is not sufficient to protect workers' rights because it does not guarantee the right to know about workplace hazards or the right to refuse dangerous work.

Question 10

According Brenkert, acceptable conditions for whistle-blowing include all but which of the following:

Accepted Answer

According to Brenkert, whistle-blowers do not necessarily have to be current members of the organization. They can also be former employees, competitors, or members of the public. Therefore, option A is not acceptable.

Question 11

Companies can free themselves from liability for workplace injuries when employees assume the risk of employment whether the employees were coerced into hazardous work or not.

Accepted Answer

Employers cannot completely absolve themselves from liability for workplace injuries by simply having employees assume the risk. In some cases, employers' negligence or failure to provide a safe working environment can still result in legal action and compensation for injured employees. Additionally, employees cannot be coerced into assuming the risk of hazardous work and employers have a responsibility to provide a safe workplace.

Question 12

John R. Boatright in "Occupational Health and Safety" believes that the common law defense "voluntary assumption of risk" is faulty because it relies on circular reasoning and many employees may be coerced into accepting conditions that they would not otherwise accept.

Accepted Answer

John R. Boatright argues that the common law defense of "voluntary assumption of risk" is flawed because it uses circular reasoning and may not accurately represent employees' true choices due to coercion.

Question 13

T of F: As told by Brenkert in "Whistle-blowing, Moral Integrity, and Organizational Ethics," a whistle-blower can rest assured that his or her reporting of the company's wrongdoing will be met with gratitude from the organization.

Accepted Answer

According to Brenkert, whistle-blowers often face retaliation, exclusion, and other negative consequences from their organizations for reporting wrongdoing, instead of gratitude.

Question 14

Ronald Duska in "Whistle-Blowing and Employee Loyalty" would most likely agree with which of these statements

Accepted Answer

Ronald Duska argues that the concept of loyalty does not appropriately apply to corporations since they are not entities capable of mutual relationships like those between individuals. Therefore, he believes that employees do not owe companies a duty of loyalty in the traditional sense, which supports the idea that there is no need for a moral justification for whistle-blowing based on loyalty considerations.

Question 15

According to Ronald Duska in "Whistle-blowing and Employee Loyalty", it is appropriate to evaluate whistle-blowing as analogous to calling a foul on one's own team in sports.

Accepted Answer

The answer of According to Ronald Duska in "Whistle-blowing and...

Question 16

Under the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA)workers can walk off a work site if they determine there is "imminent danger" by working.

Accepted Answer

Under OSHA, workers have the right to refuse to work in conditions that they believe are dangerous and could result in serious injury or death. This is known as the "right to refuse unsafe work." If an employee determines that there is an "imminent danger" in the workplace, they can walk off the job and raise their concerns to their employer or OSHA.

Question 17

In "In Defense of the Contract at Will", Richard Epstein argues that the fairness and morality of EAW contracts negates the significant costs for a company associated with the adoption of EAW contracts.

Accepted Answer

Richard Epstein, in "In Defense of the Contract at Will," does not argue that the fairness and morality of Employment at Will (EAW) contracts negate the significant costs for a company associated with the adoption of EAW contracts. Instead, he argues that EAW allows for greater flexibility and efficiency in the labor market, which can benefit both employers and employees, without specifically claiming that it negates the costs for companies.

Question 18

Which author(s)would most likely agree with the statement that EAW treats employees as a piece of equipment and does not show them the respect they are due as persons

Accepted Answer

Patricia H. Werhane and Tara J. Radin are known for their work in business ethics, with a particular focus on treating employees with respect and dignity. They would likely agree with the statement that EAW treats employees as mere equipment and does not give them the respect they deserve as people.

Question 19

According to Richard A. Epstein "In Defense of the Contract at Will" which of these does he use to justify EAW

Accepted Answer

Epstein justifies Employment at Will (EAW) on the grounds of both fairness and utility, arguing that it promotes efficiency and respects the autonomy of both employers and employees.

Question 20

Patricia H. Werhane and Tara J. Radin state that "at-will" employees only make up a small minority of private sector employees.

Accepted Answer

The majority of private sector employees in the United States are considered "at-will" employees, meaning they can be dismissed by an employer for any reason (that is not illegal) and without warning, as long as the reason is not illegal.

Quiz 3: Ethical Treatment of Employees