Page 2 of 2 [ 18 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

wblastyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Apr 2005
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 533
Location: UK

19 Aug 2010, 12:50 pm

ToughDiamond wrote:
I don't think it's exactly stupid for the manager to do that, though it's lousy behaviour.....I think it's more that you've discovered one of the disadvantages of the world of work - they won't let you apply your own conscience to the job. You aren't expected to have opinions about ethics and morality. Business is not run by ethics, business is the accumulation of capital in whatever way happens to work, and statements about ethics from business people are only made to keep the public quiet.

Hence why sociopaths flourish in the world of business?



ToughDiamond
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2008
Age: 72
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,534

20 Aug 2010, 6:09 am

wblastyn wrote:
ToughDiamond wrote:
I don't think it's exactly stupid for the manager to do that, though it's lousy behaviour.....I think it's more that you've discovered one of the disadvantages of the world of work - they won't let you apply your own conscience to the job. You aren't expected to have opinions about ethics and morality. Business is not run by ethics, business is the accumulation of capital in whatever way happens to work, and statements about ethics from business people are only made to keep the public quiet.

Hence why sociopaths flourish in the world of business?

But of course! What we're seeing here is the "externalisation" of corporate costs - in this case they're saving time and money by transferring the problem onto the unsuspecting customers. They're hoping nobody will notice and sue them. It's the company that is the sociopath rather than the individuals, who are usually just harrassed employees doing whatever they need to do to hang onto their livelihood, though I'm sure some individuals have some choice in their behaviour.