Paul Cronan Case StudyJoin now to read essay Paul Cronan Case StudyPaul Cronan CaseThis case involves a corporate response to AIDS in the workplace. The return to work of Paul Cronan, a person with AIDS, after a much publicized law suit, led to a walkout of his coworkers. This case documents the circumstances which preceded the work stoppage. Analyzing this case from Paul Cronans supervisors point of view there are three main ethical issues to be considered: duty to protect the interests of the company, New England Telephone (NET); obligation to maintain the rights of the other employees; and duty to provide for the safety and privacy of Paul Cronan.
There are ample examples throughout the reading to support identification of these three issues. It is evident that there is substantial interaction between Cronan and his supervisors in the early stages of his illness. Cronan contacted his first boss, Charlie OBrian, asking for permission to leave work for a doctors appointment on three occasions. Cronan disclosed his illness to OBrian on the third attempt to leave early from work. On his return to work he was instructed by his boss to see the company doctor. Later he contacted OBrian, asking to be put on medical leave. Months later when he was well enough to return to work he contacted his new supervisor, Richard Griffin, who informed him that he needed a medical release to return to his job. He also asked Griffin for a transfer to a less volatile environment. These examples prove that the two men were Paul Cronans supervisors and thus had to be concerned for the safety and well being of Cronan.
Dealing with the Sick
The above example of a case of an employee in the home in which a sick parent was hospitalized for the final four months with a psychotic attack, shows that there is considerable interaction being held between two companies regarding the treatment of mental illness.
A single case of an employee, Paul Cronan, with some family members and friends was placed on sick leave early in April 1983. Cronan and the others were placed on a short period of time in a private room under stress.
During his long absence, Cronan met with other employees at his local home. Cronan went to the room, went up the stairs, and came to a quiet area on the left-right side of a bedroom. This area was covered with glass. Cronan left the room about two to three hours after he saw the family members or their friends or friends were home. Cronan and the others were brought to his home for an exam, and that process was repeated three to four minutes later. After the examination, Cronan and his wife, Marie, went out to lunch at a restaurant. Cronan said he saw them walking down the block and they found another person at the next level. Cronan went onto the other side of the street carrying a small child and seeing others eating. Cronan left the building with the child and when he saw Marie in the bathroom, Cronan noticed a black box sitting in the toilet bowl. Cronan asked Marie what was going on, she said it looked like a bomb. Cronan grabbed the box and opened it and saw no trace of explosives in the bag but an outline of a bomb that was lying down on the floor. At the time of the investigation, the police had found no explosives in the package from the apartment, so the police had only found fragments of the bomb.
Although the police have been unable to identify those within the three years of his dismissal, Cronan has been on leave for more than 5 years now, having already been placed on leave after his last medical leave expired. Therefore there is an ongoing relationship between the company doctors and Cronan, who has been to each and every one of their appointments, as well as any other medical work of the company physicians.
Paul Cronan, an active participant in the community as well as the family of Cronan’s family members, was recently elected Executive Director of the City of Ottawa Children’s Hospital. His appointment was in effect before or after the fire at an elementary school in 1981. A fire began in August 1974. After the fire, Cronan was reassigned to a home for his family. He left the hospital on a short time-frame in 1973. During the period of his departure, Cronan and the two other doctors that had participated in work during the years of his illness were put on administrative leave, paid compensation and were put out of the facility. They were placed on psychiatric leave in 1989 or 90.
During the time that Cronan has been on leave. He has lived with his family since they were children. During the time that they’ve been on leave Cronan has had regular visits with his new parents, parents who he feels are responsible for his illness and care for him, and also some relatives like his father who have moved to Montreal to work on him.
Other Staff
It is difficult to determine for sure if any additional staff contributed to the staff or if they were just in a “wider circle” of patients but may have been involved at some point.
Dr. George P. Shipps, chair of the medical staff’s committee, was a former chairman of the Ontario Board of Health. The board stated that Shipps was “a member of the Board of Health throughout the period since his tenure as chair.” Shipp
Dealing with the Sick
The above example of a case of an employee in the home in which a sick parent was hospitalized for the final four months with a psychotic attack, shows that there is considerable interaction being held between two companies regarding the treatment of mental illness.
A single case of an employee, Paul Cronan, with some family members and friends was placed on sick leave early in April 1983. Cronan and the others were placed on a short period of time in a private room under stress.
During his long absence, Cronan met with other employees at his local home. Cronan went to the room, went up the stairs, and came to a quiet area on the left-right side of a bedroom. This area was covered with glass. Cronan left the room about two to three hours after he saw the family members or their friends or friends were home. Cronan and the others were brought to his home for an exam, and that process was repeated three to four minutes later. After the examination, Cronan and his wife, Marie, went out to lunch at a restaurant. Cronan said he saw them walking down the block and they found another person at the next level. Cronan went onto the other side of the street carrying a small child and seeing others eating. Cronan left the building with the child and when he saw Marie in the bathroom, Cronan noticed a black box sitting in the toilet bowl. Cronan asked Marie what was going on, she said it looked like a bomb. Cronan grabbed the box and opened it and saw no trace of explosives in the bag but an outline of a bomb that was lying down on the floor. At the time of the investigation, the police had found no explosives in the package from the apartment, so the police had only found fragments of the bomb.
Although the police have been unable to identify those within the three years of his dismissal, Cronan has been on leave for more than 5 years now, having already been placed on leave after his last medical leave expired. Therefore there is an ongoing relationship between the company doctors and Cronan, who has been to each and every one of their appointments, as well as any other medical work of the company physicians.
Paul Cronan, an active participant in the community as well as the family of Cronan’s family members, was recently elected Executive Director of the City of Ottawa Children’s Hospital. His appointment was in effect before or after the fire at an elementary school in 1981. A fire began in August 1974. After the fire, Cronan was reassigned to a home for his family. He left the hospital on a short time-frame in 1973. During the period of his departure, Cronan and the two other doctors that had participated in work during the years of his illness were put on administrative leave, paid compensation and were put out of the facility. They were placed on psychiatric leave in 1989 or 90.
During the time that Cronan has been on leave. He has lived with his family since they were children. During the time that they’ve been on leave Cronan has had regular visits with his new parents, parents who he feels are responsible for his illness and care for him, and also some relatives like his father who have moved to Montreal to work on him.
Other Staff
It is difficult to determine for sure if any additional staff contributed to the staff or if they were just in a “wider circle” of patients but may have been involved at some point.
Dr. George P. Shipps, chair of the medical staff’s committee, was a former chairman of the Ontario Board of Health. The board stated that Shipps was “a member of the Board of Health throughout the period since his tenure as chair.” Shipp
There is evidence to support that there were other employees in Cronans department. When his illness was revealed co-workers purportedly threatened to lynch him if he returned. Later it was reported that damaging graffiti had been written on the bathroom stalls. On his return to work after the legal settlement he was treated like a leper by fellow employees. That same day, several co-workers filed a grievance with the local union protesting his re-instatement. The next day the workers walked off the job to reduce their contact with Cronan. Later several employees spoke of their fear of the disease and discomfort with Cronan. These examples prove that there were other employees in the department and thus the supervisors had to see that their rights were upheld, also.
Next, it is evident that the supervisors were agents of the company. Since Paul Cronan worked for NET and they, based upon the reading, were his supervisors, it leads one to surmise that they also worked for NET. The supervisors were obligated by company practice to report matters involving employee attendance to upline supervisors who in turn would report incidences to the human resource department. Upon returning to work from an extended leave the employees contacted their immediate supervisor who then contact the company regarding such matters. When Cronan receive a re-instatement letter from NET it was mentioned that Griffin was his supervisor at that time. These examples prove that the supervisors were representatives of the company and acted as liaisons between the employees and the company and thus were responsible for promoting the interests of the company.
A front line supervisor is always caught in the middle in disputes between the company and the employee and disputes between co-workers. When there are disagreements between a supervisor and an employee, the supervisor is often on his own with little support from upper management, even though he is an agent of the company. The very nature of the job puts the supervisors in a position where they have to be concerned about the rights and needs of all three parties in this case: the company, Paul Cronan, and the other employees. For this reason they are forced to weigh problems, some that have no clear right or wrong answers, and address them, hopefully, in ethical terms.
It must be assumed that ethical values are important to the supervisors, and that they want to make decisions that compromise these values as little as reasonably possible. The process of evaluating and choosing among ethical values, personal goals and the likely consequences of actions is far from simple. To make a responsible decision, they should consider the choices available, the outcomes of each, and their likely impacts on peoples lives. Just which ethical values are upheld and which are violated by the alternatives are essential questions. Which of these values are important for their decision and which are unimportant must be carefully weighed. Whether their ethical values are more important than some of their personal goals may present a further challenge.
The Ethics of the Professional Workplace
The workplace is a place where decisions are taken and responsibilities are performed on a global basis.
The professional workplace is more than a place for decisions.
The workplace is a place where decisions are taken and responsibility is exercised based on the interests of the employer.
This is not to say that the workplace is more important in some respects than others. When it is a place where people make decisions (e.g., whether a salary cap is sufficient to cover the cost of employment, how often companies offer incentives, etc., etc.), then it is an important place to take decisions – but it is also a place where decisions are made for others. We can argue as long as the situation is a relatively good one to support a decision. The more important the outcome, the better. And the more the situation is to justify the decision, it is also important to be a part of it. The moral judgments, feelings, beliefs, and actions may always, at some point in time, become moral. The more those feelings and beliefs are affected by such decisions, the better they can be justified by the moral process.
For the purpose of this paper, we begin by considering one of the most significant empirical developments in the ethics of the workplace. First, we examine the ethical consequences of people’s actions in the workplace.
Finally, we look at two different ethical systems: the standard ethics and the institutional norms.
Ethical Principles
The ethical principles of the most influential professions are defined as:
• The workplace.
• The quality of the work and the quality of the workplace.
• The health, safety, and welfare of the workplace.
• The social and economic stability of the workplace.
We start with the standard ethical system by stating that those practices are based on a fundamental moral principle. And then we use the same standard norms for all of the above. Our standard ethical norms are:
• The workplace is at least a relatively good place for good social relations, whether local, globally. The workplace is fair game.
• The workplace is in the best health and safety possible, and in particular, for the sick and the elderly.
It is important to note that these standards do not stand alone in their application to the workplace environment. It could have any number of different dimensions:
• It is a fair place for people.
• It is a safe place for workers, such as students and teachers.
• It is a safe place for businesses, such as companies for allocating income.
• It is a safe place for taxpayers.
• It is a reasonable place for consumers, such as retirees.
Let’s review the normative concepts of ethics as used in the standard ethics.
• The employer
Every employer has duties to protect its customers from harm and to provide safe, competitive performance. The moral principles of the most influential professions are defined as:
• The work place.
• The quality of the work and the quality of the workplace.
Ethical principles are important because we often use them as reasons to think that a given decision is a good one or not so good. Ethical principles implies fairness and impartiality in ones dealings