Workshop Assessment 2 - Draft PDF

Preview

Summary

Download Workshop Assessment 2 - Draft PDF

Description

Workshop Assessment 2 1. From a utilitarian position, what are the ethical issues in this situation? Utilitarianism is one of many ethical theories that is used to determine what is right from wrong. It focuses on particular outcomes. Utilitarians should make an ethical choice on the basis of what will have the greatest outcome for the greatest number. I believe Banerji may have believed that her actions were unlawful that’s why she registered under a false name. If she used her real name she would may be portraying that her opinions are ethically correct. Michaela Banerji uploaded anonymous information in regards to the government’s immigration policy to twitter. Her actions were morally incorrect as the outcome of those anonymous tweets did not produce the best possible result for herself and also the greater community. She unfortunately did not go about relaying that information in the best possible way for her and the organisation involved. Although the tweets were made anonymously there is always a way for it to be traced back to the offender. Content posted on the interest is there forever, even if it is deleted there is still a way to uncover it again. Relaying that information to the greater community about her criticisms of the Australian governments immigration policies’ and its treatment of immigrants breached confidentiality rules of the government. She did not seek approval from appropriate sources to release this information to the wider community. Banerji’s actions produced the reverse of happiness. She created pain through the expression of her opinion. Was her opinion warranted? Her opinion I believe created more harm than good for the greatest number of people. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, however, careful consideration must be taken into account when working as a public servant. Ethical issues breached by Michaela Banerji:  Breach of contract or public code of conduct – all public servants are required to be apolitical (that is, not interest or involved in politics). Banerji breached this by posting her criticism of the Australian government’s policy of immigrants coming to Australia.  Confidentiality – Banerji may have posted confidential information provided to her form the government through her employment.  Breach of social media guidelines – these guidelines deem it inappropriate for employees to post information that has not already been approved.  Banerji also mentioned particular people in some social media posts which made it personal.

2. What ethical approach to public service professional conduct did the High Court take in its decision? Four Ethical Approaches: 1. Utilitarian ethics (outcome based)

2. Deontological ethics (duty based) 3. Virtue ethics (virtue based) 4. Communication ethics (community based) Common elements of all four approaches are the following:  Impartiality: weighting interests equally  Rationality: backed by reasons a rational person would accept  Consistency: standards applied similarly to similar cases  Reversibility: standards that apply no matter who “makes” the rules. It could be argued that the high court took a deontology approach as Banerji’s act was no morally right, however, her actions lead to the introduction that public servants can be fired for posting their political views or confidential information to social media. The court have been able to distinguish between was is right and what is wrong.

3. Do you agree or disagree? And why?

Act Utilitarianism relates to an action that becomes morally correct when it produces the greatest good for the greatest number of people. In the case of Michaela Banerji she acted on her own volition without any regard for the greater good and for how her opinions would affect the greater community. She also had total disregard about the implications her opinions would have on her employment and future public servants who committed the same crime. Rule utilitarianism relates to the implementation of a specific rule that would then apply to similar actions made in the future. After Banerji’s actions the high court ruled that government organisations now have the right to dismiss public servants if they participate in political social media posts. In a way you could say that this is a good thing to come out of Banerji’s dismissal as it jumpstarted an over-hall of the public service industry in regards to social media.





High court has upheld a decision to sack a public servant, Michaela Banerji for anonymous social media posts that criticised the government’s immigration policy. Court upheld an appeal from the worker’s compensation agency Comcare which argued it was reasonable for the immigration department to sack Banerji.





Banerji was sacked for breaching the public service code of conduct – which requires public servants to be apolitical “at all times” – for anonymous tweets from LaLegale twitter account. After an unsuccessful unfair dismissal claim, Banerji won a worker’s compensation case when the administrative appeals tribunal found he sacking was unreasonable in aprt because it breached the implied freedom....