From an HR perspective, both were wrong. First of all, Mr Allen Davis being a responsible person who was positioned as Executive Vice president shouldn’t have utilized his business relation for his own betterment. Secondly, though Mr Garbo was aiming for future retention of his client. He shouldn’t have offered a job to Ms Amber without following regular recruitment process. As a result Mr. Garbo created a none equality among his employees which would lead to non-retention of productive & profitability work force. In short, shortcuts in doing business would not be favourable to any organization
Q2.Does Amber have an ethical responsibility in this case? If so, explain.
As Ms Amber was very well aware about the reason behind her intake. And the intention of Mr Garbo to hire her in a higher pay scale. At least she should have made an attempt to prove herself as a better employee and retain the confidentiality. But in return she had ruined the internal and external relation of both the firms. Due to her unorthodox activities, she had spoiled environmental relationship among employee-employer relationship. And a result of her nature of taking things lightly and irresponsibility in the work would spoil the business and friendship between her Dad and her company. And eventually she would become a danger for her dad’s job too. In short, it would have been better for Ms. Amber in improving her professional skills and work ethics if she would have analysed her ethical responsibility.
Q3. Were other employees at Bill Garbo’s company impacted by his decision to hire Amber? Explain how.
Mr Garbo’s decision in hiring Amber had impacted his staff in a negative angle, because they were not given equal opportunity. It is a result of not having a firm policy...