Plaintiff Moseley is an employee of Defendant Pepco Energy Services, Inc. (“PES”). He has been employed by PES or its corporate predecessors for over twenty- five years. PES, a subsidiary of Defendant Pepco Holdings, Inc. (“PHI”), provides deregulated energy and energy- related services for residential, small business, and large commercial customers.
1. Using duty- based ethical principles, what facts or circumstances in this case would lead Moseley to disclose Herzog’s behavior?
2. Using outcome- based ethical principles, what issues would Moseley have to analyze in making the decision to report Herzog’s behavior? What would be the risks to Moseley? The benefits?
3. Under the Business Process Pragmatism ™ steps, what alternatives might Moseley have had in this situation?
4. Regardless of who wins this case at trial, in performing Step 5 (Evaluation) of the Business Process Pragmatism ™ procedure, what changes should the company take with regard to the complaint process?

  • CreatedJune 18, 2014
  • Files Included
Post your question