Case Two: The White Arch Casino Enoch Thompson was employed for several years as a dealer at the White Arch Casino (WAC) in Las Vegas, Nevada. WAC is one of Colossal Corporation’s entertainment/gaming division companies. Over the years, Thompson developed a reputation as one of the most skillful high-stakes poker dealers in Nevada. He was often requested by top poker players at the Texas Hold’em Tournament of Champions, a televised annual event in Las Vegas. Nine months ago, Thompson was approached by Shirley Eugest, the manager of the Venetian Flamingo Casino—a rival company of WAC. Eugest offered Thompson a substantial salary increase to leave WAC and come to work for her. Thompson agreed to think about this offer and get back to Eugest in 48 hours. When he returned to WAC, he asked several of the other dealers what they thought about the offer. One of those dealers immediately went to WAC’s manager, Sal Pending, and told him the details of Eugest’s offer to Thompson. Upon hearing of the offer, Pending called Thompson into his office and said: “If you stay with WAC, I promise that next year you will receive a promotion with a 50 percent raise and a five-year contract.” This sounded good to Thompson, and he turned down the offer from Eugest to stay with WAC. However, last week he was dismissed from WAC due to corporate downsizing. Although nothing has happened at this point, the vice president of human resources is concerned that Thompson might try to hold WAC to Pending’s promise. Ethical issues Was the promise legally enforceable? Was the promise morally enforceable? Is it right to downsize Thompson?

Was the promise legally enforceable? & was the promise morally enforceable?
A. Many ethical theories like Utilitarianism, Deontology and Feminism will not support the action of WAC and its HR as ethical. According to Utilitarianism theory, when such actions are taken against Thomson, the same is communicated to the dealers. This will let them know the lack of trust and the competitive mindset of the Management. This makes them demotivated, as a result, they would sooner or later want to leave the company. This is a huge loss to the Company. Applying Deontology, the actions of WAC and the HR represent that they are deciding on the basis of consequences (Thomson might try to hold WAC to Pending’s Promise). This violates the basic promise of the theory which is based on the good will of Humans and not the consequences. It also violates the categorical imperatives of Kant.
Is it right to downsize Thompson?
A. Considering the ethical theories as mentioned above, it is not morally correct to downsize Thomson.
 
“Looking for a Similar Assignment? Get Expert Help at an Amazing Discount!”

What Students Are Saying About Us

.......... Customer ID: 12*** | Rating: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
"Honestly, I was afraid to send my paper to you, but splendidwritings.com proved they are a trustworthy service. My essay was done in less than a day, and I received a brilliant piece. I didn’t even believe it was my essay at first 🙂 Great job, thank you!"

.......... Customer ID: 14***| Rating: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
"The company has some nice prices and good content. I ordered a term paper here and got a very good one. I'll keep ordering from this website."

"Order a Custom Paper on Similar Assignment! No Plagiarism! Enjoy 20% Discount"