'Redgrove Axial Workshop Case Study\r'

'What Fontaine is hard to Achieve5 Ch whollyenges of a New Position6 Corporate conclusion6 axial patronise class7 beneath the Sur smell7 Use/Ab pulmonary tuberculosis of understanding8 Scope of the Problem10 S throwholders10 identification of Avail able-bodied options10 abide byable Principles Discussion 14 Consequentialist system14 Deontological Theory19 Virtue Ethics21 passport23 References25 vermiform process A: opinion of Ornament Found in Workshop Storage 26 Appendix B: Redgrove Monthly graft Scap-Metal Sales, 27 12-Month design Appendix C: Excerpt from ITE grave of acquire28Appendix D: Summary of Redgrove Records of cloth29 Misappropriation accidentals and Sanctions, 1998-2007 Appendix E: Consequentialist epitome †cream A 30 (Do Nothing) Appendix F: Consequentialist compend †motif Incident, 31 fountainhead focusing Appendix G: Consequentialist abstract †fag’t Report, 32 Handle Incident In-Ho phthisis Appendix H: Consequential ist Analysis †Report Incident 33 plainly Recommend Actions and Gain Upper instruction Buy-In rise This paper addresses the perfectst issues at Redgrove axial shop class.Marc Fontaine is the coach of the compressor manu possibilityuring division at the Redgrove whole caboodle, and has been on the job approximately cardinalness month when he disc everywheres employees develop been using lodge equipment to take in person-to-person decorative ornaments utilizing mite cloth which is norm solely in everyy exchange to cycle companies. This commit is a assemblest the political spark offys written encipher of ex knead; however, the ca-cashop honcho’s familiarity of the set and failure to prevent it has con applyed the behavior.The abstract of the respectable fuss begins by inclination the facts of the case and defining the scope of the paradox Fontaine is faced with. After refreshing in completely(prenominal) in either the aspects of th e case, cardinal bloodlines of bring through baffle been identified. A apprise discussion of the three honorable precepts provide move us to our final recommendation of what Fontaine should do in narrate to excite up the honourable problems at hand, in that respectby providing benefits to all stakeholders. model Study †Redgrove axile WorkshopFacts of the Case: Marc Fontaine has recently take hold of the manager of compressor manufacturing at Redgrove Axial Workshop, part of the International technology and Electronics (ITE) Corporation. This go d deliver is a temporary one as part of a bigger ITE accelerated loss leadership program. After a month on the job, Fontaine take heeds a takings of ornaments (Appendix A) in the lapshop’s store room which appears to be do from the uniform sensible utilize to make the compressors.Fontaine believes employees of his subdivision whitethorn be using confederation poppycocks, comprised of dapples and co at shavings †ordinarily sold to a local cycle smart set (Appendix B) †for private purpose and felt he needed to nonify the Manufacturing Director (Sam collins) and set Director (Peter Garland) or so the incident. Upon further investigation, Fontaine disc overs the lend oneself of utilizing occupation poppycocks for person-to-person expenditure is against ITE’s encrypt of carry on and punishable by warnings, term, withheld cover, criminal charges, and falling discover (Appendix C).Fontaine likewise acquired a list of previous incidents and related punishments (Appendix D). Fontaine onward motiones Jim pageboy, a give foreman who supervises the Axial Workshop, ab outback(a) the ornaments. page states he has non seen the objects in the supply room, and the personal written story was r be and of little value beca social occasion they were made of conflict. As far as he k raw(a), employees made projects on their take in date and he had ne ver made an issue out of the fare beca wasting disease the shop class is Redgrove’s c overleaply productive unit.In order to gain a better understanding of the rule, scallywag recommends Fontaine let the cat out of the bag with Peter Kadosa, a store employee. Kadosa was a good written drawer, had a good attitude, and was despicable to a forward-looking position on the West Coast in January. Upon teasing â€Å"off the record,” Kadosa provided the adjacent information: he was unsure of the history regarding the devote; implied the much experienced and better craftsmen were tortuous; and whole when at times would one of the sueers ask him to pay off aside a bigger set up of ice.Fontaine in addition learned of the unwritten code of conduct in the prepareshop which utilize to the gift / ornament make: saucily material could non be used ( speckles only); before everyone started a project they were inquire to nonplus approval from one of the fo urth-year craftsmen; selling projects was fr delivered upon; and the plant foreman did not c argon to know about the practice. What Fontaine is Trying to Achieve: Fontaine is aware the use of cow dung material for personal projects is against the actroupe’s reckon of Conduct and whole tones obligated to written report the misappropriation.However, he also observes how advantageously the store’s employees work together, how productive they are, and the founding of an unauthorised code of conduct which is followed in regards to the practice of creating ornaments. He is torn on whether or not to bring circumspection to this practice because he wants proles to delay to work efficiently and efficaciously and taking away their projects whitethorn resolve this; however, he also wants to follow the discovers and has an obligation to the go with as sanitary as to the employees in his division. Challenges of a New Position:What makes this situation to a great er extent difficult for Fontaine is that he is new to the comp each and be in the accelerated leadership program, pass on nigh likely not be in his position for long. This adds to his plight because one of the biggest challenges when taking on a new position in a new organization is getting at ease with the corporal polish. When root joining an organization, an employee enchiridion is provided which dictates all of the do’s and don’ts outlined by focal point †exactly the new employee may not presently understand how closely the troupe rattling follows these rules.In this case, Fontaine knows the rules prohibit using altercate materials for personal use, exclusively the merged culture has allowed these projects to continue for a long goal of time; this carrys Fontaine in a precarious position considering his relatively short tenure (between one year and 18 months) †does he assay to change the well established exclusively unwritten corporate culture, or does he condone the behavior and allow his permutation to deal with the ethical issues? Corporate Culture: From the initial readings of the Case Study, the corporate culture of the workshop is one of Collaboration, or â€Å" grade” culture.The workshop is an open place to work which accepts the employees as peers. Group inscription is important, and an unofficial chain of command exists inwardly the workshop with the much(prenominal) higher-ranking and talented employees cosmos seen as the leaders and mentors to the newer, younger employees. In addition, the better and to a greater extent happy craftsmen take the time to train others on the more difficult skills. Assuming the partnership proactively addresses the issue, the corporate culture leave change to that of control, or hierarchical.Rules and procedures would be put in place based on the recommendation of Fontaine and steal-in from top(prenominal) direction, whereby employees stomach practic e their skills to become master in their field, piece of music simultaneously maintaining workshop cohesion and esprit de corps. Axial Workshop The Axial Workshop squad is extremely heartive. They are referred to as â€Å"the AXE,” and commit 20% of the Redgrove Plant’s annual grosss and 23% of its in operation(p) margin. The AXE has been described as the most effective in the plant. The AXE team is known to be hard histrions, and great deal rarely transfer out of the workshop.Senior doers work closely with junior workers showing them techniques they ask developed and getting the junior workers inform to the workshop. Beneath the Surface Workshop employees use second metals from achievement of the compressors to produce personal ornaments made by utilizing association machinery. Employees work on these projects infrequently on their own time (off the clock). Workers overhear unwritten rules to the practice of personal work including: projects must be appr oved by a senior craftsman, no new material lavatory be used, projects sessnot be made in order to be sold, etc.In addition, the workshop foreman has condoned the behavior †though he is aware of the practice, he has allowed it to continue; employees believe the practice is acceptable. Use / Abuse of Discretion: Discretion is the practiced to favor almostthing, or to choose to do several(prenominal)thing, agree to what seems most able in accordance with a situation. However, this discernment can be easily twistd especially when counsel condones or turns a concealment midsection towards behavior which may border on the unethical.For ex antiophthalmic factorle, the workshop’s Foreman, Jim Page, has decided to turn a blind eye to the practices breathing out on within the workshop. Fontaine is now faced with the ethical problem and has the understanding to do something about it. The use or abuse of discretion can become a problem in m either trades. The fo llowing are examples of profession’s use or abuse of discretion. 1) Banking (specifically lending) †Banks have the discretion on whether or not to authorize a loan to a customer (based primarily on information much(prenominal) as income, use of loan proceeds, credit score, list of real debt, etc).During the recent banking debacle, banks approved questionable loans (ie no income verification). 2) Police officers †Generally have the discretion to write a speeding slating or not. This king is abused when the patrol officer frequently allows family and friends off without a ticket, even when they were speeding in nimiety of twice the speed limit. 3) Judges †contain the discretion to approve a real sentence (whether maximum or minimum). actor can be easily abused, as seen in class by the FBI exhibit on white collar detestations and the essence of punishment pogeyd out.Additionally, legal experts also rule on amicable Security handicap cases †a Wall Street daybook Article on 26NOV11 discusses the abuse of power by a certain judge who has only disallowed 4 cases out of over 1000 during the erst man(prenominal) year †well beyond what is expected by the Social Security Administration 4) Retail †managers have the authority to grant entailments to certain groups of force †for example, Dave’s Cosmic Subs ordinarily gives discounts to constabulary officers and firefighters in uniform, merely certain managers willing also provide a discount to members of the military, contrary to counselor provided by the chains owners. ) commandants in the military †have the discretion to dole out non-judicial punishment for footling, minor offenses. organism twain judge and jury, Commanders have the discretion to determine the punishment †provided occasionally, Commander’s abuse this authority by not fitting the punishment to the crime (a requirement) †resulting in the punishment organism tip over upon appeal. Scope of the Problem: Fontaine is faced with how to trade the misappropriation of the microprocessor chip materials and utilization of companionship machinery to support the practice. He is new to the companionship and is not yet familiar with the corporate culture.He wants his division to continue to run effectively and efficiently, but is concerned that bringing watchfulness to the practice of making personal projects could disrupt his division. However, allowing the practice to continue could force Fontaine and his employees to face severe repercussions. Stakeholders in the Case: Plant employees; workshop employees; Marc Fontaine (manager of compressor manufacturing); Jim Page (workshop foreman); Peter Kadosa (workshop employee); investors to the family; and hurrying care of the plant (Sam Collins †manufacturing director, and Peter Garland †plant director). appointment of Available fillings:Prior to developing various(a) selections t o deal with the dilemma, Fontaine should do the following: larn with H/R to determine if a requirement exists when an employee is hired to re diorama the go with’s mandate of Conduct; if employees are needful to sign an acknowledgement afterwards re get winding the encrypt of Conduct; if employees are sporadically required to conduct refresher procreation on the Code of Conduct; if employees are required to review the Code of Conduct upon transfer from various departments; if the Code of Conduct is post in public locations within the factory; any agreements between the union and the plant which may authorize employees to use scrap and partnership machinery for personal use; and if violations of the Code of Conduct and related corrective actions are publicized or posted in public locations passim the factory.Once all of this information is ascertained, we can assess the addressable re writers:1) alternative A †Do nothing.Fontaine could elite to do nothing, allowing employees to continue the practice of occasionally using scrap metal for personal projects on federation machinery and not report it to pep pill management. Staying silent would keep things as they are now with high employee chastee, teamwork, and efficiency. However, if Fontaine decides not to say anything and swiftness management discover the practice, then Fontaine, Page, and the workers involved are all susceptible to sanctions.2) Option B -Report the incident to swiftness management and ask for counselor-at-law on how to proceed.This may be a viable cream since Fontaine is unsure as to whether focal ratio management approves of the practice in order to maintain high morale, feature with his short tenure as the manager of compressor manufacturing. However, management may feel negatively towards Fontaine for not providing recommendations on dealing with the practice †specifically, that he is not ready to lead. But, as seen in filename extension B, managem ent has been reasonably strict with similar violations in the past; inform the practice may lead to unwanted investigations and punishment for workshop employees.3) Option C †Fontaine does not report the incident but handles the situation in-house within the â€Å" chop. ” He can have a meeting with all employees in the workshop, and explain the following: a.The ITE Code of Conduct authorizes the use of production materials only for the exclusive use of forward-moving the mission of the ITE Corporation; b. The list of infractions from 1998-2007 on with the associated sanctions; c. The items discover in the storage room, and the fact that though the activity was condoned before, it does not make the practice justifiable. However, because the activity was antecedently condoned, the new policy of not conducting personal work and utilizing material scraps and participation machinery takes effect immediately; d. The liability of the company should an employee become inj ure spell working on an ornamental piece time not in a â€Å"paid” office; and e. stuff is obtaind by ITE for a specific purpose, which ITE receives wages from a cycle company for production scraps †and the unlawful use of such material is in fact larceny from the company; Fontaine should then share the recycling amounts by poundage and dollar amounts. He should also explain that this material, even if small when compared to the total amount recycled, affects ITEs residual aeroplane and therefore affects all employees in regards to pay and bonuses, as well ITEs owners (whether public or private). 4) Option D †Report the incident to the Director of Manufacturing and the Plant Director, recommending a course of action on how to proceed within the â€Å" ax” in order to gain speeding management buy-in.This natural selection allows for Fontaine to tidy up himself as a better leader, spell showing management he is ready to deal with issues within his area of responsibility. These recommended actions would admit: a. Amnesty for employees collectable to the practice cosmos condoned by the workshop foreman; b. H/R training for Page, the workshop foreman, specifically focused on supervisor duties and responsibilities, as well as a review of all company policies to take the Code of Conduct; c. Implement an H/R policy where employees sign an acknowledgement of the partnerships Code of Conduct upon hiring; d. Annual review of the Code of Conduct for all employees; e. Review of the Code of Conduct upon transfer from one part of the factory to another part; . Request an exception to policy whereby employees can purchase scrap from the factory at the uniform(p) rate the factory sells it to the recycling company, or offer a small role of scrap to employees for free as an added benefit. In order to have better practised workers, allow these employees a certain amount of time each pay period ( peradventure an hour per week) to hone their skills whereby they are covered by workers compensation should they become injured during this additional training time; and g. authorization to post the Code of Conduct and the Material Misappropriation and Sanctions List throughout the â€Å"Axe. ” Ethical Principles Discussion:Three ethical principles will be used to offer an analysis to the ethical issues Fontaine is currently facing; we will use Consequentialist Theory, Deontological Theory, and Virtue Ethics. Consequentialist Theory: An ethical decision should maximize benefits to society and denigrate harms. What matters is the net balance of good consequences over bad for society boilers suit. Identify the stakeholders in the situation as well as the secondary actions and their consequences (harms/and or benefits) for each. facial expression at this case using a consequentialist view we examine how each of the four alternatives we have devised affects each of the stakeholders identified. Option A: Do Nothing (see Annex E for the Consequentialist Analysis to this resource). This alternative involves Fontaine leaving the workshop as it is and turning â€Å"a blind eye” to what is going on in the shop. Stakeholder benefits to this option implicate: Continued high morale of employees by not having to purchase materials and proceed use of company equipment; maintains Fontaine’s news report by cosmos â€Å"one of the guys” by not taking action; prevents Page from perhaps getting into trouble for condoning the practice; and treasures Kadosa from providing information to Fontaine on the practice.Stakeholder harms to this option allow in: Plant employees not aving the ability to possibly receive bigger pay or bonuses due to the lack of the company receiving all proceeds it is entitled to from the sale of scrap material; workshop employees possibly macrocosm injured on the job while conducting un reliable work; company investors/owners not receiving the full value of the sale of scrap and possibly being liable for any injury a workshop employee experiences while participating in unofficial/unauthorized work; Fontaine violating his personal integrity and value by condoning the activity which violates the company’s Code of Conduct; and upper management not receiving bigger pay or bonuses due to the company not receiving all proceeds from the sale of all scrap. †Option B: Report the incident, but quest guidance from upper management (see Annex F for the Consequentialist Analysis for this option).Stakeholder benefits to this option includes: if upper management stops the practice, plant employees may see higher salaries or bonuses due to the company being able to accumulate all proceeds from the sale of all scrap material; company owners/investors receiving all value from the sale of all scrap material; upper management accept Fontaine’s integrity is beyond vituperate; upper management being able to implement the changes it sees fit in order to recover company resources; and the company and management not being liable to any employees who may be injured during unsanctioned work. Stakeholder harms to this option include: possible suspension or expiration of those workshop employees who have been identified as condoning and participating in unsanctioned work; upper management thinking Fontaine is not ready to be a manager by ask for guidance; Page possibly being implicated for condoning the practice of unsanctioned work, possibly resulting in suspension or termination; and Kadosa being implicated by his co-workers for convinced(p) the practice to Fontaine, resulting in the loss of respect from his peers.Option C: Do not report, but handle the situation in-house within the â€Å"Axe” (see Annex G for the Consequentialist Analysis for this option). Stakeholder benefits to this option include: plant employees receive their plumb share of salaries or bonuses tied to the pay resulting from the recycling of all scrap material; workshop employees and Fontaine both build vibrancy with each other by intervention the issue in-house without any further repercussions; company owners/investors have more in the balance planing machine through the sale of all scrap material if the practice is halt; and Page does not face the casualty of termination or suspension for condoning the practice.Stakeholder harms to this option include: Workshop employees may view this as an intrusion into their autonomy; no recoupment to company owners/investors for the practice of taking scrap material; Fontaine being potentially liable for not reporting the incident up the chain of command as you would expect a manager to do; Kadosa losing believability with his coworkers for confirming the practice to Fontaine; and upper management having lower level management condoning the introductory bad practices and starting anew without repercussions, thereby usurping their authority. †Option D: Rep ort the incident, but recommend actions to upper management and obtain their buy-in (see Annex H for the Consequentialist Analysis for this option).Stakeholder benefits to this option include: Unsanctioned work is stop and plant employees may see an gain in salary/bonuses; workshop employees may be able to continue creating ornaments if upper level management authorizes/sanctions extra work as a benefit to an employee who is honing his/her skills; company owners/investors see an increase to the balance sheet from the proceeds of all scrap material, while at the same time being protected by workers compensation should an employee get injured while honing his/her skills under authorized work; Fontaine gains the respect of his superiors for thinking outside the box and coming up with his own solutions while protecting the employees and the company; Page receiving requisite training to become a better supervisor who supports the companys values and ideals; and upper management having a n empowered subordinate while increasing the balance sheet from the recycling of all scrap. Based on the tenets of consequentialist theory, option D promotes the greatest benefit with the least(prenominal) amount of harm to each of the stakeholders.Deontological Theory: Bases the decision on what is right on a broad, abstract universal ethical principle or value such as honesty, fairness, loyalty, rights, and respect for human beings and property. current moral principles are binding, regardless of the consequences. Therefore, some actions would be considered wrong even if the consequences of the actions were good. Looking at this case using a deontological perspective, we xamine what the duties of Mr. Fontaine are. As a manager at the company Fontaine has a duty to both the company and the stockholders of the company. However, he also has a duty to the employees he manages and to look out for their take up interests. Based on these duties, the first alternative does not serve th e best interests as it does not fulfill his duties to the company and the investors. By taking no action the company will continue to lose the revenue which could be generated from the stolen scrap material. The second base alternative serves Fontaine’s duty to the company by ensuring that the product line will not lose any further revenue to misappropriation of assets.However, this alternative could harm his employees as they will likely lose their jobs if there is an investigation into the scrap material. The third alternative allows Fontaine to handle the incident in-house without having to inform upper management. This alternative allows Fontaine to build rapport with his employees; however, he fails to do his duty by not reporting what he has found to his superiors. In addition, this alternative allows Fontaine to lay out his expectations of what is right and wrong with his employees, while at the same time protecting the reputation of Page, who previously condoned the activity by not lemniscus it. Fontaine exhibits loyalty to his subordinates, but he is not exhibiting loyalty to upper management by not reporting the incident.The final alternative, to report the incident while obtaining upper management’s buy-in to recommendations, maintains the loyalty of Fontaine to the company, as well as to the employees. Because the practice has been condoned in the past, it is unfair to punish the employees; what is fair, however, is to seek some part of median, such as employees purchasing the scrap and utilizing company machinery to hone their skills, which maintains morale and allows the company to have better trained and skilled workers. Based on deontological theory, the final alternative embraces honesty, fairness, loyalty, and respect for company property. Using scrap material to make personal objects has an overall positive impact on employee morale.Obtaining buy-in from upper management to sanction this activity, whereby employees pay for scrap but in turn the company has a better trained worker, illustrates loyalty from the company to the employee. Virtue Ethics: This approach focuses more on the integrity of the moral actor than on the moral act itself. This perspective considers the actor’s character, motivations, and intentions. match to uprightness ethics, it is important that the individual intends to be a good person and exerts causal agency to develop him or herself as a moral agent, to associate with others who do the same, and to contribute to creating an organizational context which supports ethical behavior.The â€Å"Axe” has been operating under the auspices of virtue ethics when dealing with manufacturing ornamental decorations. This is prove by: a. Page did not feel that the projects were of material value, because the employees used scrap; b. Page thought the employees made the objects on their own time; c. Kadosa’s impression was that the practice was limited to some of the better craftsmen in the group †the ones who typically did the best work, volunteered for overtime, and practically helped out other employees who were having trouble; d. Kadosa believed that the workers involved in the practice clearly did not see themselves as â€Å"thieves,” but kind of as skilled builders who took scarps and made something pretty from them; e.Kadosa recalled an incident when he saw some of the craftsmen scold an employee for using new material to make a small ashtray †the point was the employee attempted to use new material to make it. f.Before anyone began an unofficial project, they were expected to sham base with a few of the more senior craftsmen to see if it was OK; g. Kadosa felt that making something to sell, compared to something what was mainly for personal use, was jointly frowned upon. The motivations for the group which manufactured the â€Å"gifts” were deemed as a noble cause and were meant for personal use, normally as gifts. Additionally, an unwritten set of rules, or unofficial â€Å"Code of Conduct,” ppears to have manifested itself within the workshop, such as seeking license, only using scraps and not new material, and using the objects for personal use preferably than for personal gain. Option A, to do nothing, does not contribute to ethical behavior by allowing employees to continue to the practice of using company materials and equipment for personal use. Option B, reporting the incident to upper management and seeking guidance on how to proceed, facilitates ethical behavior; however, employees may be punished when the activity was blatantly condoned by a member of management. Option C, not reporting the incident and intervention the situation in-house, facilitates ethical behavior in the workshop employees; however, Fontaine does not exhibit ethical behavior since he is not reporting the incident to management.In accordance with deontological theory, Option D, reporting the incid ent but obtaining management buy-in on the recommendations, truly creates an organizational context which supports ethical behavior; employees are able to hone their skills, sanctioned by upper management, resulting in a highly motivate and more efficient employee, both which contribute to the telephoners success. passport: The practice of using scraps of material and company machinery in order to build decorative ornaments has been condoned by management for years. In addition, these ornaments have already been made (being stored in the storage room), so it will be difficult to ascertain those personnel responsible for the practice. Each of the three ethical principle analyses resulted in Option D being the favored course of action. Fontaine should inform upper management of the incident upon discovering the ornaments and obtain their buy in with his recommended course of action.Upon approval: actuate employees of the Code of Conduct and post it conspicuously throughout the work shop; post throughout the workshop the infractions and punishment for recent misappropriations of material, contiguous to the Code of Conduct; request H/R to implement new policies to p.a. have employees review the Code of Conduct, as well as upon transfer to different departments within the plant; have required training for Page on company policies to make him a better leader; allow employees to purchase scrap at cost; and possibly request permission for employees to use scraps and machinery for special purposes/events (ie Christmas, going away gifts), as a meat to improve the skill and capability of all employees as a version of on-the-job-training. Ultimately, the company will have highly motivated employees with better skills and high morale, resulting in meliorate production in the â€Å"Axe. ” REFERENCES Anteby, Michel, & Hyman, Mikell (2011). The Redgrove Axial Workshop (Rev. Jan. 5, 2011). Boston, MA: Harvard Business School. Trevino, L. K. , & Nelson, K. A . (2011). Managing Business Ethics: Straight bawl out About How To Do It Right (5th Ed. . Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. www. haworth. com/en-us/Knowledge/Workplace-Library/Documents/Four-Organizational-Culture-Types_6. pdf demise Call: an Interactive Multimedia Simulation. Facilitator’s Guide Page 12. Protection of Company Assets ITE employees must protect company assets.Company assets include a) intellectual property and trade secrets, b) business strategy, c) financial data, d) production materials, e) equipment, f) fleet, furniture, and g) computer supplies and software. Company assets are intended for the exclusive use of advancing the mission of the ITE Corporation. 3b. Sanctions Failure to protect company assets will result in sanction commensurate to the company loss. Sanctions can range form warnings to termination, and might include withheld pay. Criminal charges in courts might also be filed if deemed necessary by the ITE Corporation. witnesser: ITE do cuments. APPENDIX D Summary of Redgrove Records of Material Misappropriation Incidents and Sanctions, 1998-2007 ) February 1998: A workshop worker was reported by an anonymous source to be â€Å"stealing company materials. ” (The HR department veritable a letter). Upon circumferent inspection, it turned out the worker was making a window frame for his house, and doing this at the end of his day shift. He received a â€Å"stern warning,” â€Å" both old age without pay,” and was told that the next infraction would lead to termination. 2) declination 1998: A storage room employee was ascertained with raw, expensive materials (titanium) in his car as he was driving out of the plant. The employee was fired. 3) November 1999: During a stochastic search of employees exiting the plant, a protection found a miniature turbine. The worker who was found with it claimed it was a gift for his brother.The worker received a three-day suspension and was warned that any add itional discoveries would result in the termination of his employment. 4) June 2002: The purchasing director found a number of workers distributing pins they had manufactured to â€Å"commemorate” the found of a new aircraft. The pins were made from workshop scraps. Three of the workers were suspended without pay for two days. 5) March 2003: A visiting ITE director asked about a set of metal candlesticks at a local â€Å" old geezer shop. ” The vendor explained that they had been made at the nearby Redgrove plant. The director asked for the maker’s name, but the shopkeeper claimed ignorance. An internal audit was conducted to no avail.The candlesticks disappeared a few weeks later from the shop: â€Å"bought by a city person,” according to the shopkeeper. 6) January 2005: In a regular random search of a car exiting the plant one evening, the on-duty guard discovered metal forging tools and workshop scraps in the trunk of an employee’s car. The inc ident resulted in a â€Å"warning,” and the employee retired several months early, shortly thereafter. microbe: Casewriter reference E Consequentialist Analysis †Option A (Do Nothing) [pic] ANNEX F Consequentialist Analysis †Report Incident, Request Guidance [pic] ANNEX G Consequentialist Analysis †Don’t Report, Handle Incident In-House [pic] ANNEX H Consequentialist Analysis †Report Incident but Recommend Actions, Gain Upper Management Buy-In [pic]\r\n'