During the last semester of his program, a Multinational Organization in Automobile business offers John a job in their Indian operations, with 6 months intensive job training in Germany. The compensation offered was almost 10 times of what he would be getting in his present employment. . The new organization would also compensate him for whatever he should pay to the present employer for returning his leave pay, education expenses or liquidated damages as per his original contract. Should John take up the decision of joining the new company?
PART B: John should not leave his present company. All employment is a legal bondage, no doubt. But, the relationship of employer employee goes beyond that. The employer places full trust on the employee for a conscientious work performance. ( Heathfield, S. M, 13-04-2009) The employee delivers goods to the best of his abilities. What he is not able to do because of his deficiency in skill, knowledge or even attitude is acceptable, but knowingly withholding performance of a known skill, or causing a deliberate negligence of duty is not pardonable.
Legal enforcement always has limitations. Most of the things go by moral bindings in life. Whether it is a family life or work life the element of trust forms the basic ethics of living. John should not let his present employer down. The present employer had gone out of the way to help John in fulfilling his ambition of completing a PG program in Management. In fact, it is this program opportunity had led the way for the new offer from another company. The present employer had not granted him the privileges with a parental attitude.
The CEO had specifically called him, offered him the help and expressed his wish that John returns to the company job with added knowledge for a long tenure. John paying back the salaries he had earned during the special leave period or giving back the expenses which the organization had taken for his education, or for that matter sincerely remitting the liquidated damages as per earlier contract, will all belittle the basic value of human gratitude and acknowledgement. (Hunsinger, D. v. D. , 1995, p. 65) The present employer may not be able to sue him for more than what they had expended on John.
Their feeling of hurt with this incident, and based on that, their attitude towards employee motivation programs will all shrink, affecting the future incumbents to the organization. So, John should not leave the employment and reject the Offer given to him by the multinational company, with ten fold compensation figures. PART C: John should take up the new offer All employment is a legal arrangement. The employer selects the right candidate, pays him a fair compensation and the employee discharges his performance with his utmost faith on his ability.
The employee shall not cheat the employer in any of his work related activities. He should be faithful to his employer and work for him with total commitment. He should trust his employer and feel at liberty to ask him to give whatever he thinks right on his part to ask. He should never hesitate to remind him of a privilege or condition that the employer forgets to extend. Likewise, he shall not demand for something which is not due to him. He can always get things clarified wherever he has doubts about his rights. (Assertive Communication, 13-04-2009)
Beyond this relationship, no employer has right to expect an employee to continue in employment for ever. Mostly conflict of interest arises only when one accepts another employment while at working with one organization disturbing his independence in working with the original organization. (Faculty Guide, 13-04-2009) John’s opportunity is a very rare occurrence. He can not dream of such an offer in the future. He should take it up. Giving up an opportunity, which will benefit him and his family’s prosperity because of increased income will be wrong.,
For that matter he might be depriving the benefits to society by not contributing his competence in a wider area of work. Sometimes we confuse morals with ethics. Morals are stated to be selfish too, elsewhere (BrainMeta. Com, 13-042009) All John is expected to do is to go back to his present employer, explain the CEO the situation and his wish to go for the more prosperous job. He should be transparent enough to express his predicament. His taking up the new job is by all means for a large packet of compensation.
It also gives him the opportunity in another country with more scope to improve his competence. From what has been his case all along, he is a person thriving for knowledge and this offer carries with it a good training program. He can always be grateful to his present employer on many future occasions, without damage to any of his personal or social values. For instance, there may be scope for him to be a contact to the new employer for the present employer to enter into collaboration arrangements or business arrangements.