During Mr. Paul Cronan’s medical leave, he had heard that a NET manager in Brookline, Massachusetts had announced to several employees that he had AIDS (17). Mr. Paul Cronan’s also heard that another manger at Needham wanted to disinfect the bathroom facilities there even though Mr. Paul Cronan had not worked at Needham for almost two years (18).
On September 13, 1985, Mr. Paul Cronan was diagnosed with AIDS, also on the same day, NET send him a letter stating that NET must perform a medical evaluation before placing him in a job position and even if the medical evaluation resulted in certain job restrictions, NET is willing to make accommodations (19).
Between September 1985 and June 1986, Mr. Paul Cronan had been in and out of the hospital (20). On June 10, 1986, NET notified Mr. Paul Cronan that he is no longer with NET and that all illness benefit would end. Mr. Paul Cronan would be put on Long Term Disability (LTD) and social security disability insurance (21).
In December 1985, Mr. Paul Cronan enlisted the Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts (CLUM) and filed a $1.45 million civil law suit in state court against NET (22). The suit alleged that Mr. Paul Cronan’s privacy was violated under the state privacy law by NET for disclosing his illness (23). The suit further alleged NET had discriminated against Mr. Paul Cronan for having a disability caused by his illness, AIDS, and thus was in violation of statue prohibiting discrimination against the disabled (24).
In late August 1985, NET created a new corporate policy to address AIDS in the work place. (25)
II. CRITICAL LEGAL ISSUES
The legal issues are:
- Is it legal to qualify AIDS under the American with Disabilities Act?
- Is it legal to discuss Mr. Paul Cronan’s medical condition with other employees or co-workers?
- Is it legal to discriminate against Mr. Paul Cronan in the workplace because of his medical condition?
- Is it legal to harass Mr. Paul Cronan because of his sexual preferences?
III. LEGAL RULES
Legal Issue 1
Section 3-2 of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) defines a disability as "A physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more of the major life activities of such individual.” (U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission)
“(2) Disability.--The term "disability" means, with respect to an individual— (A) a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more of the major life activities of such individual; (B) a record of such an impairment; or (C) being regarded as having such an impairment.” (U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission)
Legal Issue 2
Section 102-c-3-B of the ADA states that an employee’s medical information is confidential record but the supervisor and managers may be informed of any work related restrictions caused by the medical condition.
“(B) information obtained regarding the medical condition or history of the applicant is collected and maintained on separate forms and in separate medical files and is treated as a confidential medical record, except that-- (i) supervisors and managers may be informed regarding necessary restrictions on the work or duties of the employee and necessary accommodations; (ii) first aid and safety personnel may be informed, when appropriate, if the disability might require emergency treatment; and (iii) government officials investigating compliance with this Act shall be provided relevant information on request;” (U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission)
Legal Issue 3
Section 102-a of the ADA further states that discrimination in all employment practices, including job application, hiring, firing, advancement, compensation, training, and other terms, conditions, and privileges of employment, is prohibited by the ADA.
“(a) General Rule.--No covered entity shall discriminate against a qualified individual with a disability because of the disability of such individual in regard to job application procedures, the hiring, advancement, or discharge of employees, employee compensation, job training, and other terms, conditions, and privileges of employment.” (i)
Furthermore, section 102 B1 of the ADA states “limiting, segregating, or classifying a job applicant or employee in a way that adversely affects the opportunities or status of such applicant or employee because of the disability of such applicant or employee.”(i)
Legal Issue 4
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) defines sexual harassment as a form of sex discrimination as covered under the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Specifically, “Sexual Harassment - This includes practices ranging from direct requests for sexual favors to workplace conditions that create a hostile environment for persons of either gender, including same sex harassment. (The "hostile environment" standard also applies to harassment on the bases of race, color, national origin, religion, age, and disability.)” (United States Department of Justice Civil Rights Division)
IV. OBSERVATIONS
Mr. Paul Cronan missed work for months at a time before and after he was diagnosed with AIDS. His AIDS illness qualified him as having a disability under the ADA.
Mr. Paul Cronan hid his lifestyle from his employer and peers at NET, but once they found out he contracted AIDS, he was discriminated against by his peers. He was further threatened with lynching and was sexually harassed by company co-workers when they wrote anti-gay messages on the bathroom stalls.
NET was accommodating to Mr. Paul Cronan’s illness and paid all of his illness benefits until he was terminated. NET attempted to allow Mr. Paul Cronan to return to work but was untimely in their response.
Mr. Paul Cronan and CLUM alleged that AIDS was a handicap and covered by statute, bringing a discrimination suit against NET.
This case was early in the AIDS legal issue and such was a ‘precedent setting case” for future lawsuits by additional persons infected by AIDS. NET later added a new policy to specially address AIDS in the workplace.
V. CONCLUSIONS
Since AIDS was not widely understood in 1985, NET was unprepared for an occurrence of this kind. Nevertheless, NET’s management failed to mitigate and resolve the situation at all levels and in the process several infractions were breached.
Mr. Paul Cronan’s immediate supervisor, Mr. Charles O’Brian, first violated the company’s Privacy of Employee Records policy by sharing Mr. Paul Cronan’s condition with other fellow supervisors. Higher management also viewed Mr. Paul Cronan’s medical condition more as an excuse for poor performance rather than a serious debilitating condition which incapacitated him from satisfactory work performed.
In trying to return Mr. Paul Cronan to work, NET responded months late and with less than adequate accommodation. NET as a whole also failed to provide a tolerant work environment and failed to educate and inform its workforce about AIDS. As a result of above errors, Mr. Paul Cronan suffered much undue duress and resentment which he could definitely do without.
Mr. Paul Cronan was also intimidated by the hostile feelings and opinions shaping the work environment. As a result, he did not overtly work with NET’s management nor did NET’s management recognize the collision that ultimately resulted in a lawsuit.
ETHICAL CASE ANALYSIS
I. ISSUES
Refer to the LEGAL ANALYSIS MODEL
II. EVIDENCE
The ethical issues are:
- Is it appropriate to forgo Mr. Paul Cronan’s privacy?
- Is it appropriate to condone prejudicial and discriminatory behavior in the work place?
- Is it appropriate to discriminate against alternative lifestyle?
III. ASSUMPTIONS
Ethical Issue 1
In spirit, NET’s own “Privacy of Employee Records” policy, is an ethical and moral policy. It fits into the Consequential camp and specifically relates to Rule Utilitarianism which simply put, should produce the greatest good in the long run by adopting a course of action or rule.
However in practice, NET’s management closely mirrored the Nonconsequential ethics behavior. By focusing not on the outcome of any ethical decision, but rather on how one’s decision will adhere to specific rules or principles that one have set for oneself.
Ethical Issue 2
Egoism is also explained as "an act is moral if it promotes the individual's own self-interest." (Wehmhoefer) The egoist thinks only about personal benefits and does not really care about the impact of one’s decision on anybody else.
Ethical Issue 3
One aspect of Kant’s Nonconsequential ethics is that of Categorical Imperative. It means to think from the standpoint of everyone else and to respect others. People are autonomists and should be their own persons. They are free to choose their lifestyle and others should behave accordingly and be independent of prejudices, personal preferences, and self-serving motives. (Bruce, D. & Parks, J)
IV. ETHICAL ALTERNATIVES
NET could have consulted with the union and transferred Mr. Paul Cronan to another position within the company that limited his contact with people.
Mr. Charles O’Brian could have told Mr. Paul Cronan that he is obligated to inform management the nature of his ailment in order to ensure the protection of everyone working for NET. This ethical choice embodies utilitarianism and totalitarianism as well. (Bruce, D. & Parks, J)
NET could have paid off Mr. Paul Cronan in exchange for his resignation.
V. JUDGMENT AND RATIONALE
Mr. Charles O’Brian should be honest with Mr. Paul Cronan about disclosing Mr. Paul Cronan’s medical information to management. The ethical basis of this course of action is the ethical theory based upon rule utilitarianism where accordingly, the “attempt to achieve the greatest good for the greatest number without violating any rules or principles to which one may adhere.” (Wehmhoefer)
NET should have prevented the development of bigotry and a hostile work environment through adequate education. The ethical course of action would be initially providing widespread company dissemination of the policy regarding AIDS in the workplace, followed by intense education of the workers about AIDS.
In the end, NET’s management tried to right the wrong but failed in their execution and their attempt was perceived by Mr. Paul Cronan as hurtful and prejudicial. Ironically, the out of court settlement was perhaps the best result for both parties. Since NET effectively limited its liability and increased AIDS awareness in the work place while Mr. Paul Cronan was compensated and his job restored back to him.
Notes
- Meyers, Paul. (1990). Paul Cronan and New England Telephone Company (A) Harvard Business School, 9-490-055.
- Ibid.
(3) Ibid.
(4) Ibid.
(5) Ibid.
(6) Ibid.
(7) Ibid.
(8) Ibid.
(9) Ibid.
(10) Ibid.
(11) Ibid.
(12) Ibid.
(13) Ibid.
(14) Ibid.
(15) Ibid.
(16) Ibid.
(17) Ibid.
(18) Ibid.
(19) Ibid.
(20) Ibid.
(21) Ibid.
(22) Ibid.
(23) Ibid.
(24) Ibid.
(25) Ibid.
Bibliography
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (n.d.) Discriminatory Practices.
Retrieved on October 29, 2006 from
www.eeoc.gov/abouteeo/overview_practices.html
United States Department of Justice Civil Rights Division. (n.d.) American
Disability Act. Retrieved October 29, 2006 from
www.usdoj.gov/crt/ada/pubs/ada.txt
Wehmhoefer, Richard A. “A General Overview of Ethics” Copyright 2006
Bruce, D. & Parks, J. (2002) Understanding Ethics. Indiana: Alpha Books.