Moral and Ethical Rights of Social Workers

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Introduction

Social work refers to a professional discipline seeking to improve the life quality and well-being of an individual, community or group by organizing researches, training, working and direct practices on behalf of any given institution or company. Although social work has a national code of ethics, every country has specific codes based on their state codes. This phenomenon makes scholars doubt how the codes can lead to ethical and moral harmony amongst the vast social workers in a given work setting. However, Culver, Gert & Clouser (2006) maintain that the chief purpose of a professional code of ethics is to socialize and educate into any given profession. Discussed below are some of the answers to questions regarding the height of sexual harassment at a Florida-based Jacksonville Shipyards, Inc. (JSI).

Protection of Robinson

According to Boatright (2009), the male coworkers with Lois Robinson at JSI were not justified to post humiliating pictures of pornographic contents on the walls and notice boards at their workplace.

JSI management should curb sexual discrimination

This is because their actions were unwarranted according to the presidential order policy on all federal contractors (JSI being one) that eradicated any kind of conduct that would be personally offensive and abusive to the solemn dignity of any worker, either sexually or otherwise.

Workers had no right to post pornographic pictures

Since this policy was incorporated in the standard rulebook of JSI Company, the senior supervisor had the mandate to implement it and to consequently protect Robinson from the sexual harassment she experienced while working at the company. However, it is a pity to see the JSI supervisors decline to order the removal of the pornographic pictures but instead accuse Ms. Robinson of negligence of duty while spending too much time viewing the pictures.

Sexual harassment is not a personal problem

The management got it all wrong when they decided to be reluctant over the sexual discrimination crisis in their company, it even sounds crazy that the JSI could not elect an EOO coordinator to assist in the implementation of the “equal employment opportunities” policy as by the presidential order.

Prohibition of sexual discrimination

Lois Robinson’s treatment by her male co-workers is clearly depicted as a form of sex discrimination because whenever the male workers made crucial sex jokes, she was always sidelined. In fact, she often left her male co-workers to proceed with their exchange of jokes in her absentia.

Robinson was sexually discriminated

One could even question the integrity and morals of the JSI management too since they kept supplying her male co-workers with pinup calendars that contained nude women in sexually attractive postures. Much stronger evidence of sex discrimination by the male workers in JSI was depicted when; the words “Men Only” were scribbled on the door of the trailer where even the female workers including her had to enter to check on paperwork. Both the JSI and their male workers are guilty of sexually harassing Robinson and other female workers in the company because JSI management not only failed to comply with the presidential order policy on equal employment opportunities but also failed to tame the discrimination of their male workers in their female counterparts.

The male co-workers were illegal

Therefore, their actions towards female workers in the company are in all ways unjustified and illegal. According to the presidential order policy, the male co-workers were guilty of sexually harassing Ms. Robinson by offending her personal dignity hence breaking the worker’s code of ethics.

The offense against Robinson

Ms. Robinson was offended by her male colleagues in a number of ways discussed here below. The offenses she endured came from both the JSI management and her male workmates.

How Ms. Robinson was harmed

In as much as her male colleagues did not portray much regarding the physical sexual harassment of Ms. Robinson, we see a number of emotional imbalances caused by their actions. For instance, a photo given to her by her male co-worker mimicking her long blonde hair while using the whip humiliated her.

Employees have a right not to be offended

The male co-workers occasionally ridiculed her by giving her a pornographic magazine while those around her laughed at her, it is said that the JSI admitted women only as sex objects. Moreover, the persistent posting of magazines, graffiti, calendars, pictures and other materials displaying naked women infuriated Ms. Robinson. It is clear that she was not harmed physically but she was offended nonetheless. Offending a worker contradicts the process of justification of the professional actions of workers (Bryan & Kaplan, 2009).

Significance of the sign on the trailer’s doorpost

Being involved in ship repair services for the United States navy, the ship filter’s trailer was a common room for both the male and female workers to check on their paperwork. Therefore, the words “Men Only” that were written on the trailer’s doorposts were undoubted of sexual discrimination, especially by the male workers.

The posting of the sign was morally objectionable

The inscription of the words on the trailer’s doorpost is highly objectionable due to the fact that the management even tried to destroy the evidence by painting over the words to conceal them. The action showed that the JSI management realized the guilt and contempt contained in the connotation of the words. It could not be a mere act of preventing Robinson from viewing the pornographic materials on the trailer’s doorpost since their major aim was to sexually harass her. It is therefore worth noting that all these sexual harassment on the female workers were designed by the JSI supervisors and implemented by their male workers.

References

Boatright, J. (2009). Ethics and the conduct of business (6^th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Bryan, V., & Kaplan, L. (2009). A conceptual framework for considering informed consent. The Journal of Social Work Values and Ethics, 6(3). Web.

Clouser, K., Gert, B., & Culver, C. (2006). Bioethics: A systematic Approach (2^nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.

Click Here To Order Now!