 |
|
MRSC has joined with Janice Corbin and Janet May, Partners, Sound Employment Solutions, Rhonda Hilyer, President, Agreement Dynamics,and Bruce Schroeder, Employment/Litigation Attorney, Summit Law Group, to bring you the "HR Advisor" article series on employment and labor law issues affecting Washington local governments. The "HR Advisor" will feature a new article each month with timely HR management information and advice you can use.*
It's Time to have a Conversation about Ethics
June 2006
Janice Corbin and Janet May
Sound
Employment Solutions, LLC
Recently there have been several examples, both on a national and local level, of public employees and employers acting in a manner that can best be described as “ethically challenged.” These examples cover a wide spectrum from instances of government officials shading the truth, to incidents of public employees misappropriating funds, to incidents of employees using government property and resources for personal gain.
Many theorists argue that ethical behavior in this country has substantially deteriorated. They site numerous studies to illustrate the point. For instance, in one recent survey, two thirds of the large Fortune 500 corporations were found to have been involved in ethics violations. In another survey, it was found that a majority of high school students have cheated at some point in their high school career. Yet another survey found that cheating on income taxes has become common place.
Other theorists argue that there has not actually been a deterioration of ethics, but that increased media attention to the issue of ethics has led to the perception that ethical behavior has declined. Public employers have certainly experienced this increased media scrutiny. Over the past several years, some public employers have been forced to cut services based on decreased funding and/or revenues. In response, the media has begun focusing on areas where those employers are allegedly wasting resources, with the theory being that if resources were used properly, cuts in services would be unnecessary. One of the areas of alleged waste is the misuse of government funds, property or time by public employees.
Regardless of whether there has been an actual deterioration of ethical conduct, or only a perception, the need for ethical conduct by public employees is paramount. Our citizens expect and demand accountability on the part of public employers and employees. Yet, many public employers are uncomfortable taking on the issue of ethics with their employees. Part of the discomfort appears to be a concern that ethics is about an individual's values and morals. Should an employer be expected to teach an individual employee ethics, values and morals?
This discomfort is understandable. In most instances, employers cannot be expected to teach values and morals to employees because these are intrinsic characteristics that employees should bring with them on their first day of the job. Thus, instead of focusing on how to teach ethics to employees, employers should consider what organizational systems they have in place that support ethical behavior and decision-making, and then train employees on those systems. To help make the training more real to employees, employers should consider the use of scenarios addressing common ethical dilemmas.
As a start, employers should have a mission statement that identifies organizational values, goals, and objectives. One such value should be the expectation that employees with act with integrity and/or illustrate the highest ethical conduct. The mission statement also should clearly define what you are trying to accomplish as an organization. The more employees understand the mission of the organization, and their part in that mission, the more they are able to ask themselves whether their contemplated conduct will support or detract from that mission and then act accordingly.
In addition, employers should have an ethics policy that serves as the foundation for informing employees that ethical behavior/conduct/actions are important to the employer. Any such ethics policy should be reviewed by your legal counsel prior to implementation. Some provisions to consider, however, include but are not limited to:
- A restatement of your organization’s commitment to ethical behavior;
- A statement that the policy is applicable to all who are employed and/or associated with the public employer;
- Specific examples of what is and is not ethical behavior, including any industry specific issues, i.e., conflict of interest, preferences, use of confidential information, use of government property, and gratuities;
- An acknowledgment that sometimes the choice is not clear, and that when in doubt, the employee is to seek assistance and have a conversation with a supervisor/manager before acting;
- A statement that ethical behavior will be incorporated into the annual performance evaluation conversation; and
- A statement of the potential consequences of violating the ethics policy.
Next, although employers may not always be able to teach employees the difference between right and wrong, you can educate them about the conduct that is and is not acceptable in the employer’s workplace. A systematic reminder and policy review of some of your more high risk policies should occur annually. Discuss the policies with your employees, provides examples, and allow employees the time to ask questions or get clarification. Understand, however, that you simply cannot have policies that address every decision that may arise in a workplace. Therefore, you should consider teaching your employees about basic problem-solving for those occasions where your current policies, procedures and practices do not provide a concrete answer to the proper course of action.
Finally, understand that all the systems in the world are meaningless without accountability throughout all levels of the organization. Although disciplining employees who do not follow policies and procedures is one method of accountability, it is not the only method. Other methods include, but are not limited to: regular and unannounced audits, routine debriefing about the outcome of complex or difficult organizational decisions, and recognizing those employees that demonstrate a strong commitment to ethical behavior.
| Bruce Schroeder is an employment / litigation attorney with Summit Law Group, Seattle. Bruce's practice is concentrated on representing management in the entire range of employment law matters. More . |  |
|
Janice Corbin is a partner with
Sound Employment Solutions, LLC, Seattle. Janice has over 15 years of
human resources experience with the Seattle Police Department and the
International Harvester Truck Company and has worked in the law enforcement
field for over 22 years.
More.
Janet May is a partner and attorney with Sound Employment Solutions, LLC, Seattle. Janet has over ten years of experience in the labor and employment law field, and has represented both management and labor. More. |
 |
| Rhonda Hilyer, President and Founder of Agreement Dynamics, is an international consultant with a reputation for helping convert traditional, conflict-based environments into productive, collaborative ones. More. |  |
*The Articles appearing in the "HR Advisor" column represent the opinions of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Municipal Research & Services Center.