Ethics Unit 4 LJ

docx

School

University of the People *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

1404

Subject

Philosophy

Date

Jan 9, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

6

Uploaded by DeaconFieldMagpie39

Report
Non-compete agreements Department of General Studies, University of the People PHIL 1404: Ethics and Social Responsibility Dr. Jacqueline Thomas February 23, 2023
Introduction In this paper, I will discuss the pros and cons of non-compete agreements for both general workers and high-level employees. Furthermore, I will go into detail about the conflicts that arise, different perspectives toward this agreement and lastly, I will give a quick overview of the utilitarianism theory. Non-compete agreements The purpose of non-compete agreements is that former employees of a company can't use their acquired skills and knowledge at another company. The employer doesn't want to give their competitors an advantage ( Byars & Stanberry, 2019) . Conflict of interests The employer represents the concern that they don't want their former employees to use their acquired knowledge and skills somewhere else, sometimes close to the former location, sometimes in general. By preventing the departed employees from doing so, they are hoping for the competitors not to get an advantage of the costs and time they put into the training of former employees. The employee most likely has the interest of the highest pay and best work environment. If they wanted to work at a similar location like the kind of their previous employee, it is likely that they would use their collective
knowledge of their previous job at the new one. This would benefit the employee as well as the new employer, because of higher efficiency and less training needed. Also, the employee would most likely want to stay in the same area as they worked in before, which could be a problem for some employers, like Jimmy John's (Byars & Stanberry, 2019). I think the best way to satisfy both sides is for the employee to appreciate their employees with a comfortable and safe work environment, as well as raises when they are adequate. Recognizing the employees' hard work and skills is a good way to keep them for this company, instead of them wanting to change jobs. Executive chef or vice president of marketing or operations The executive chef or vice president should wait, in my opinion, to take a new position. Even if they don't want to use their knowledge against their former company, the new company might extract information from them in an unsuspicious manner. By waiting for a new job, the information they have gained might no longer be valid and therefore no longer reliable. What is fair? Usually, high-level managers also have a high yearly income. Because of this, the company should put a non-compete agreement in its contract in order to keep the companies information and that of its employees safe. Because the manager has such a high income, it should not be a problem for
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
them to have a half-year gap in-between jobs. Different perspectives The two main perspectives here are either for or against a non- compete agreement. One argument for a non-compete agreement is the information and skills an employee gains during their time at the company. Another argument for a non-compete agreement is for the employee to take their position within the company seriously because they can't just switch jobs so easily. An argument against a non-compete agreement is that it could force an unhappy employee to stay with the company, even though they could earn more and have a better work environment at a different place in the same kind of business. I personally am against non-compete agreements. I had a job myself where I had to sign one and even though I didn't plan on working in the same kind of employment again, it still gave me anxiety over starting a new position, just in case there were some similarities. An ethical standpoint is that the employee should comply with the company's ethics and respect their internal work. The employees worked hard to get the company to where it is and this information should not be handed over to competitors, intentionally or unintentionally. Another ethical standpoint is that former employees should not be
limited to their choice of employment because of a former job. People should have the free choice of where they want to apply and work and have the right to use their acquired skills to get better positions and higher pay. Ethical theory I am choosing to explain utilitarianism. Utilitarianism " determines right from wrong by focusing on outcomes" (Ethics Unwrapped, n.d.) According to this theory, the outcome that causes the most good is the most ethical decision. The limitation of utilitarianism is not knowing what the outcome will be, therefore we can't know if a decision will cause the greatest good for the greatest number or the opposite (Ethics Unwrapped, n.d.). Conclusion In conclusion, there are arguments for and against non-compete agreements, however in my opinion, more speak against them.
References Byars, S. M., & Stanberry, K. (2019). Business ethics . OpenStax College and Rice University. Ethics Unwrapped. (n.d.). Utilitarianism. University of Texas. https://ethicsunwrapped.utexas.edu/glossary/utilitarianism
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help