Your task is to write a paper (maximum length of two pages double spaced) that analyzes one of the following business ethical issues. You choose which issue to write about; in this assignment, reflect deeply on a topic that matters to you. Each scenario represents a conflict in an organizational setting. In addition to applying ethical reasoning and theories to your position, you must demonstrate how as a leader you would preserve the professional relationships in question and resolve the conflict.

Option A:

At a local restaurant a prominent politician has arrived and has been seated for dinner. Several of the serving staff are upset because they disagree with the politicians political views. Some are requesting the manager on duty speak to the politician and ask him/or to leave. Explain what the manager should do in this situation and how they could resolve the conflict between the servers and the politician in the most ethical manner.

This is what I wrote, Please let me know what i did incorrectly, Thank you.

I have chosen OPTION A:

To ask somebody whom you have differing perspectives to eliminate themselves from your essence is ridiculous and infantile. Everybody has an option to their own perspectives and sentiments. Since the individual being referred to is a legislator which turns out to be on a public stage, that doesn't cause them to have less rights or more rights to be in a public eatery.

Explanation:

I choose OPTION A:

To ask somebody whom you have differing perspectives to eliminate themselves from your essence is exceptionally ridiculous and silly. Everybody has a privilege to their own perspectives and conclusions. Since the individual being referred to is a lawmaker which turns out to be on a public stage, that doesn't cause them to have less rights or more rights to be in a public caf. The workers can't single out who they choose to serve since they like or don't care for somebody's assessment. Everybody ought to be dealt with decently. Possibly somebody would stroll in the eatery that had a sexual inclination that isn't the workers inclination or convictions, or an alternate skin tone? That doesn't make the visitor any less human and that individual ought not have less fundamental rights. Foundations ought to be reasonable and tolerating of anybody that might be extraordinary.

Feelings assume a major part in the choice of the workers to decline to serve this political individual. The administrator needs to remove the feelings and sentiments from the condition. From the entrepreneur's or the board viewpoint, they have a variety of things to attend to and each paying visitor is gladly received and ought to be dealt with similarly and decently. Segregation would be a frightful name for a business and could discolor the standing of a business or could be so harming to make them bankrupt. It isn't really illicit, yet it very well may be considered out of line. Any business has that privilege to deny assistance giving it did not depend on segregation. The Social equality Demonstration of 1964 didn't cover political perspectives. It covers race, age, shading, religion and sexual direction, treating somebody in an unexpected way, ordinarily in a negative way.

From the friendliness business side of the circumstance, the thought is to make everybody welcome. The staff needs to zero in on that thought, and the executives ought to uphold it. The stand by staff can't single out who they will cause to feel welcome in the foundation. It's awful business. Victimizing anybody would not be in the well being or neighborhood. At the point when a business makes its ways for the general population, they ought to anticipate that people should come in that have an alternate gander on occasion, convictions, sentiments, nationality, religion and lives that some may not concur with. This is the world we live in. Things and individuals are perpetually evolving.

The moral hypothesis I believe that this kind of circumstance falls under is Moral Selfishness. The refusal to serve somebody with various perspectives as your own is narrow minded and concerned distinctly with the assessment of your own.