Managers Should Hire People They Do Not Want to Hire

Managers should be required to employ people they do not want to hire because they would be adhering to regulations. According to Civil Liberties Act of 1964 (n.d), the 1964 Act known as the Civil Liberties Act forbids discrimination in particular substantive areas and develops mechanisms to advance and protect equal rights. As a result, managers should include people they may not want in their companies for any other reasons apart from their skills and experience. Failure to comply with this requirement would constitute an infringement of a person’s rights and can have severe consequences including court processes that can cost a company money and its reputation. Therefore, managers should hire people they feel to have the qualifications they require for a job although they do not want to hire those people.

While a business can still make money without utilizing an ethics component, it may face issues with sustainability if it does not do so. Mayer et al. (2012a) give three main topics related to ethics. They state that they are not measurable, but people have similar reactions to the actions or conduct regarded as moral. Also, people value ethical people and want to be around them. Finally, a law-abiding company is not necessarily ethical. Based on the first two points, unethical enterprises face the risk of being unable to get customers/clients and experiencing financial troubles. People will react the same way due to the wrong practices of organizations. They will tend to avoid them because they lack morals, which will lead to challenges in selling their products and services. The revenues start to decline. In such cases, the firms will have difficulty surviving without the demand for their products and services.

Employers Following Law despite Alignment with Beliefs

Employers must always follow the law though it does not align with one’s religious beliefs. Mayer et al. (2012b) state that organizations have responsibilities. They have to maximize profits to the benefit of the owners. That obligation lies with the managers of a business as the agents of the shareholders. Because the conduct of enterprises in the business environment affects their ability to attract buyers, managers have to follow the law despite their beliefs.

Laws and court rulings are carried out through corporate governance. Businesses have policies to control their affairs. New regulations and court rulings are added to the existing rules to govern firms. On the issue of questioning people’s religious beliefs, avoiding religious discrimination requires individuals to view themselves as equal to their peers. Job applicants should not ask topics regarding religious views. Kolb (n.d) defines discrimination as the act and effect of making a distinction between one person and another. A candidate who asks about religious attitudes risks generating religious discrimination as his or her viewpoint may not fit those of the managers of a company.

Potential employers should also not ask about religious beliefs. They can be accused of discrimination on the motive to serve (Chamallas, 2013). The motive to serve occurs when people perform acts that infringe on others’ rights after completing a deed that would otherwise be considered abnormal for the current context. Religious questions have no place in interviews since they do not offer information on skills and education. Managers should ask such questions during the contract signing when candidates are given information on any conditions the company may have.

If people change their religious beliefs, they should inform organizations to make any accommodations and re-examine their contracts. Information should come in writing to preserve proof of the agreement. Organizations that apply religious rules to customers should put notices at the front of their stores and on their websites. They should state who is welcome and who is not to avoid lawsuits by discrimination. Businesses have used such signs in the US before the enactment of the Civil Liberties Act. It was used primarily against African Americans to deny them services in restaurants.

References

Chamallas, M. (2013). Vicarious liability in torts: The sex exception. Valparaiso Law Review, 48 (1): 133-193.

Civil Rights Act of 1964 (n.d). Encyclopedia of the Supreme Court of the United States

http://ezproxy.umuc.edu/login?url=http://go.galegroup.com.ezproxy.umuc.edu/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CCX3241200199&v=2.1&u=umd_umuc&it=r&p=GVRL&sw=w&asid=039d635eae97023dd03fc6ae08774370

Kolb, W. R. (n.d). Religious discrimination. Encyclopedia of Business Ethics and Society. Retrieved from http://sk.sagepub.com/reference/ethics/n692.xml

Mayer, D., Warner, D. M., Siedel, G. J., Lieberman, K. J. & Martina, R. A. (2012b). The legal environment and business law. Lardbucket.

Mayer, D., Warner, D. M., Siedel, G. J., Lieberman, K. J. & Martina, R. A. (2012b). Legal basics for entrepreneurs. Lardbucket.