Ethical Dilemma On Accepting An Offer

fragment A The Case whoremonger is a two socio-economic class Graduate Engineering Trainee in an car order in India, on a contract binding him to work for 3 more years after the readiness period. On completion of his prep ar, fundament posits entrance for a PG Program in prudence in a reputed Institute. Because of the good depiction he had created during train broadcast, the Comp either grants him modified apply with pay for this rearing. Further chief executive officer in-personly informs him that his two year education expenses will also be interpreted by the company. He also expresses his hopes to cause him back for a long land tenure with the cheek.During the last semester of his program, a Multinational validation in Automobile business poke outs rump a job in their Indian operations, with 6 months intensive job training in Ger legion(predicate). The stipend offered was almost 10 times of what he would be acquire in his commit booking. . The reinvigor ated organization would also compensate him for whatever he should pay to the present employer for returning his perish pay, education expenses or liquidated damages as per his original contract. Should backside take up the decision of joining the new company?PART B John should non leave his present company. All employment is a levelheaded bondage, no doubt. But, the descent of employer employee goes beyond that. The employer places full verify on the employee for a conscientious work performance. ( Heathfield, S. M, 13-04-2009) The employee delivers goods to the go around of his abilities. What he is non subject to do because of his deficiency in skill, intimacy or even pose is acceptable, but knowingly withholding performance of a cognize skill, or causing a view negligence of duty is non pardonable.Legal enforcement forever has limitations. Most of the things go by chaste bindings in life. Whether it is a family life or work life the element of trust forms the ba sic ethics of living. John should not let his present employer down. The present employer had foregone out of the way to help John in fulfilling his ambition of completing a PG program in Management. In fact, it is this program opportunity had led the way for the new offer from some other company. The present employer had not granted him the privileges with a parental attitude.The chief operating officer had specifically called him, offered him the help and expressed his handle that John returns to the company job with added acquaintance for a long tenure. John gainful back the salaries he had earned during the circumscribed leave period or bad back the expenses which the organization had taken for his education, or for that issue sincerely remitting the liquidated damages as per earlier contract, will all depreciate the basic value of human gratitude and acknowledgement. (Hunsinger, D. v. D. , 1995, p. 65) The present employer whitethorn not be able to sue him for more than what they had expended on John.Their feeling of hurt with this incident, and based on that, their attitude towards employee motivation programs will all shrink, touching the future incumbents to the organization. So, John should not leave the employment and reject the Offer given up to him by the multinational company, with ten twist compensation figures. PART C John should take up the new offer All employment is a legal arrangement. The employer selects the right candidate, pays him a fair compensation and the employee discharges his performance with his utmost faith on his ability.The employee shall not cheat the employer in any of his work related activities. He should be faithful to his employer and work for him with total commitment. He should trust his employer and feel at familiarity to ask him to give whatever he thinks right on his part to ask. He should never hesitate to remind him of a privilege or condition that the employer forgets to extend. Likewise, he shall not demand for something which is not callable to him. He can always get things clarified wherever he has doubts slightly his rights. (Assertive Communication, 13-04-2009)Beyond this relationship, no employer has right to expect an employee to remain in employment for ever. Mostly interlocking of interest arises only when one accepts another employment while at works with one organization disturbing his independency in working with the original organization. (Faculty Guide, 13-04-2009) Johns opportunity is a genuinely rare occurrence. He can not dream of such an offer in the future. He should take it up. Giving up an opportunity, which will benefit him and his familys prosperity because of increased income will be wrong.,For that matter he might be depriving the benefits to party by not contributing his competency in a wider area of work. sometimes we confuse morals with ethics. Morals are stated to be selfish too, elsewhere (BrainMeta. Com, 13-042009) All John is expected to do is to go back to his present employer, apologise the CEO the situation and his wish to go for the more prosperous job. He should be transparent enough to express his predicament. His victorious up the new job is by all means for a commodious packet of compensation.It also gives him the opportunity in another country with more range to improve his competence. From what has been his case all along, he is a person thriving for knowledge and this offer carries with it a good training program. He can always be grateful to his present employer on many future occasions, without damage to any of his personal or social values. For instance, there may be scope for him to be a contact to the new employer for the present employer to get to into collaboration arrangements or business arrangements.