Scenario: (Marks 20)
Mr. Usman was the chairman of AL-Mateen (Pvt) Ltd. that dealt in educational products like books, school uniforms and other related items. Mr. Ali was the project director at AL-Mateen (Pvt) Ltd. He had 15 years of experience in the related field but he was not very happy with the authoritative style of Mr. Usman. Although Mr. Usman had no experience in this field but he considered poking his nose in all matters as his prime responsibility because he had invested a large amount of money in this company.
Mr. Usman hired Uzma as a receptionist because she was a confident and smart lady and was one of his friend’s relative. Mr. Ali opposed his decision and said, “We don’t need a female at this post as this job requires lot of communication with male clients”. In-spite of his opposition Mr. Usman hired Uzma. It was her first job and she was not showing professional behavior at job. But on the other hand, Mr. Ali never gave her any guideline about dealing with customers and other related matters.
After 6 weeks Mr. Usman went to Malaysia to spend vacation with family and Mr. Ali was assigned the additional duties as acting chairman in his absence for 15 days. During these 15 days Mr. Ali terminated Uzma and hired Mr. Shahbaz who had recently completed his graduation. While explaining the reasons of Uzma’s termination he said that most of the time she was away from her seat and found to be busy in gossiping with other employees that resulted in unattended calls of clients. He said, “I visited her twice in a week and found her away from her seat”. But he emphasized more that her termination was inevitable because of her poor communication skills which led to loss of 2 major clients.
When Mr. Usman came to know about his action, he became infuriated and accused him that he is biased and was basically against hiring of a female. Usman was of the view that Uzma should be given warning and some instructions first and after that she should be fired. “The loss of 2 clients was the result of delayed response from marketing department, he further added.
Requirement
Keeping in mind the above scenario, what is your opinion about the action of Mr. Ali? Was he justified in firing Miss Uzma or was it just because of his perceptual biasness? Give logical reasons to support your answer.
Solution:
MR Ali is not on the ethical and moral side of terminating an employee from the job, as it is obvious from the job that Miss Uzma is new in the field and she is working hard, but she was not provided with the proper guidelines, and charges impose on her are totally based on personal biasness and gender inequality,I suggest that this action of Mr Ali is based on injustice and against the business and moral ethics against the rights of an employee.
For managers to be effective it is critical that they understand employee needs and motivators. One of the best ways for managers to understand the underlying emotions and goals that drive employee behavior is to create clear and open channels of communication with employees. Whether they speak with individuals, teams or entire divisions, a manager who understands and reacts to employee psychology can help create a work environment conducive to productivity.
It is obvious that this decision is not based on the reasoning and evidence, he just make assumptions and draw conclusion that she is not fit for the job, as this is shown that Mr ali is suffering from cognitive biasness of conservatism ,as his views are female are not good in communication , on this perception he never accept her as his employee and after few time terminate him by giving irrelevant and irrational behavior ,which has no proper grounds to terminate a employee just because of perception and biasness.
