You are on page 1of 8

The Moonlighter- Assignment 1 Ronak Shah Student Number: 15552664 Class Time: Tuesday 6pm

The Moonlighter The Moonlighter

Ethical Dilemma They are always limitations and boundaries under which all places like organization, home, institution, authorities and other places try follow and maintain. The purpose of boundaries is to maintain a balance in doing the right thing and not, that is what brings about Ethics. In this case we take a look at ethics in the business scenario. They are multiple code of business ethics which has been prevailed in the society, In this case study we look at the ethical dilemma issue of Moonlighting. The act of working more than one job or multiple jobs at the same time by the individuals is called moonlighting. At Zagante Technology the boss Melanie walks into her office on a Sunday night and finds one of its lead programmer Jeremy working on his own personal projects (Bronwyn Fryer 2002). Did Jeremy just break a code of ethics or is Mel just over-reacting? Form looking at this scenario there are two perspective one from the employee (Mel) and other from employer (Jeremy). There are commonly two practices found in the organization first those employers who welcome Moonlighting and those employers who dont. Mel felt that the extent Jeremy not only was working on a personal project, but also was using resources of Zangante and at period where was just at the brim of survival in technology business.

The Moonlighter From Mels perspective she expected Jeremy to shows up as prepared, present and prompt. She looked at Jeremy has hard working employee who she personally believed to deserve the group manager position, this made Mel believe that Jeremy was unethically and not happy with

his Job and might be able to give his 100% if she decided to keep him on. But did Jeremy or any employee have a right to have multiple jobs; Most of the organization hired their employees on full working hours and expect an employee to give full dedication and loyalty to their Employer. If Jeremy was working and managing multiple jobs issues like poor attentiveness, lack of sleeping, glitches and fatigue can be the issues, it could make the company suffer in long term, whereas the employee who works with full concentration on a single job.

At Zagante the organization has no policy which supports the work of the moonlighter, this has now become the ethical dilemma as there are more adverse effects and other than that fewer benefits (Amuedo, Catalina et 2009) which could be short term because not much could be done to Jeremy for Moonlighting even under the circumstance he was a full time employee. The misuse of the infrastructure/resources instead of working on the major project itself is another dilemma. Whereas the main ethical dilemma in the case study is moonlighting not only highlighted the issue of moonlighting but also suggested the policies.

The Moonlighter Contrast and Compare the Utilitarian, Libertarian, Deontological and Virtue Ethics Perspectives on the Dilemma

Moonlighting may beneficial for the employees but most of the time employees overlooked the ethical issues regarding their jobs which is not only unethical but some nonprofessional too. Whereas ethics are concerns there are multiple the perspectives like Libertarian, Utilitarian, virtue and deontological ethics can be compared and contrasted into each suitable circumstance in the case. We take a look at the utilitarian ethics that focuses on the consequences against the action which can be taken place, on the good for majority of the people instead of approaching the bad initiatives without focusing of the majority of people. (Damian and Stephen 2011). In welfare for Zagante and team it was in best choice the Mel had to keep on Jeremy, since he played a vital role in the organisation and had good experience, it would have cost them more to let go of Jeremy than keeping him on. Libertarian ethics promotes the right of human and their work also perusing that others should not hold the right to go against with it, believing that to respect other rights without interference into their work. (Damian and Stephen 2011). When Jeremy signs his contract to work with Zagante he does it with own rights and motives, he voluntarily works in Zagante and decides how to use his time and space, the act of him taking up another project with another organisation while working for Zagante is also a voluntary action. On the other hand he is not ready to give up on anyone of the projects even after Mel persuades him to concentrate on his initial job, Mel trying to avoid interfering with Jeremys life, she looks for alternatives to have him focus on one job by giving him options on benefits. These are acts of Libertinism.

The Moonlighter

Deontological ethics focuses on the rules or works under certain guidelines which need to be followed because of this ethics we can work more ethically as per the parameter settled down initially. No one is allowed to disobey such ethical or moral action. It regulates as a rules, because rules binds the people to act accordingly. (Damian and Stephen 2011). Is it Jeremys Duty not to work on other projects that are not of Zaganate? Does he have the rights to use the resources of Zaganate for his personal use? Does Mel have the right to question or fire him? These are some of the many questions than can arise in this dilemma. It is important to be professional in the decisions that we make, the reputation of any individual must not be sustain at risk. The most different ethic is the virtue ethics, this ethics refers to the outcome of the act by driving agent of their moral behaviour, it prefers that persons own moral behaviour about the happening. Depending on the situation of the businesses or the situation employees sometimes need to work more than one job, sometime employment requires pushing down the full-time or permanent work.

The Moonlighter Ethical Perspective Identification, Explanation and Justification

Making use of proprietary skills and knowledge could cause legal and ethical problems. The same in the case study discussed as most of the people performing their side work other than primary job at place of primary job, which is not actually appropriate, morally and professionally must not be considered as ethical or legal act. It may make sense to use combination of perspectives since views from each person and situations may differ, Some examples of different cases for instance if an employer signed/hired an employee with an agreement under confidentiality of job and employee does the same job in the same industry under the different employers, which may be the rival of that primary employer. Another example can be quoted if a lady working as a teacher during the permanent job in the day time and in the night she is working as a striper. (Biglaiser, Ching & Albert 2007) These are the examples that fits to understand the perspectives of employee and employers as well Similarly as Jeremy Hicks did in the office as utilizing the property of his primary job for other project assigned by an outside organisation. The best perspective I believed would work would be the Deontology, this is because, it focuses on human rights and duties and rights of each. Melanie thought that Jeremy is very dedicated towards his work but facts are different he was working on other projects to meet the deadlines instead of focusing his primary job. As an employee hired for the job and assigned to perform his job description, he should by all means without diverting his concentration or activities which may reduce his performance, he must do the assigned task rather than adopting other techniques to get advantages from the job illegally or unethically.

The Moonlighter Since it has been declared that Jeremy is moonlighting, but this declaration is not spreading in the organization yet, Melanie keep supporting him as much she can focusing both on Jeremy and Zagantes concerns, She did a favour for him by not spreading this news in the

firm for securing Jeremy as he was creative and well performer, this may come as an perspective as that of an Utilitarian. After this entire situation she found the solution for him in the form of low interest loan, for supporting him financially and approaching him to avoid the violation of policy of their firm, but Jeremy reluctant and not concerned about the firms policy and other workers. He thought that he is working and has a right to work as moonlighter, which was wrong approach once he was violation the companys policy and on the other ways which unethical and illegal as per the policy.(Kusterbck 2007), Jeremy acts as a Libertarian side of perspective.

In this case study as there was already the policy presented which is against the moonlighting by national laws, the deontological ethical approach would be the best as already there some rules and regulation introduced under which every employee lies. Nobody is allowed to go unethical; he/she should fulfil the requirement as per the code of ethics (Stinson and john 2007) The deontological ethics would be continued with some strong action or more check and balance so that no other can even think or able to perform, by making some restriction upon the system and screen of them must be filtering through the help of softwares. Amendment can be done for issuance of financial support so that these situations should not be arising in future. And make such relationship of job satisfaction by all means and probe their employees to maintain their reputation as best they are must not considered unethical.

The Moonlighter References

Amuedo-Dorantes, Catalina; Kimmel, & Jean, Moonlighting Over the Business Cycle, Economic Inquiry, October 2009, V. 47, Iss. 4, (2009), Pp. 754-65

Biglaiser, Gary; Ma, Ching-To, & Albert, Moonlighting: Public Service and Private Practice, Rand Journal of Economics, Winter 2007, V. 38, Iss. (2007) 4, Pp. 1113-33

Grace, D. and Cohen, S. (2010) Business Ethics 4th Ed. Melbourne: Oxford Fryer, Bronwyn, ,The Moonlighter Harvard Business Review; Nov2002, Vol. 80 Issue 11, (2002) P33-41, 10p,

Kusterbeck. S, Moonlighting Residents May Risk Errors, Lawsuits, Ed Legal Letter , 2007

Parham, Janis N, Gordon & Stephen P, Moonlighting: A Harsh Reality for Many Teachers, Phi Delta Kappan, Feb2011, Vol. 92 Issue 5, (2011) P. 47-51.

Stinson Jr., John F,Moonlighting: A Key To Differences In Measuring Employment Growth, Monthly Labour Review; 2007, Vol. 110 Issue 2, (2007), P30, 2p

Ziss, Jonathan S.When Moonlighting Becomes Your Problem, Pennsylvania Cpa Journal; Spring2012, Vol. 83 Issue 1, (2012), P1-2, 2.