Freedom of Expression in the Corporate Workplace : A Philosophical Inquiry

Should the employees of a large private business be free to speak out on any subject without fear of dismissal or other sanctions even when they level harsh criticisms at their employers? In this paper I will argue that they should for reasons that closely parallel one of the fundamental bases for the principle of freedom of expression pertaining to the relation between individuals of the state. An important consequence of this view is that corporate employees should be free to speak without fear of sanction even when they make false allegations that lead to a decline in either productivity or profits.Paper presented at the Conference on Business Ethics, Western Michigan University, November 1-2, 1979

Privatizing Justice: A Jurisprudential Perspective on Labor and Employment Arbitration from the Steelworkers Trilogy to Gilmer

An increasing number of employers have established arbitration systems for resolving disputes in the nonunionized workplace. The decline of collective bargaining and the rise of nonunion employment arbitration have fostered debate over whether arbitration can be imported from the unionized workplace. In Gilmer v. Interstate/Johnson Lane Corp., the Supreme Court held that a securities broker was bound to arbitrate his claim because of the Federal Arbitration Act\u27s policy to enforce agreements to arbitrate. A broad reading of Gilmer would enforce agreements to arbitrate found in any employment contract with respect to any statutory or common-law cause of action. Professors Main and Ladenson examine jurisprudential theory for answers to the concerns over the privatization of justice. The Article responds to concerns that the goals of public forums protecting basic legal values will be sacrificed in private forums, like arbitration, which may resolve disputes on the basis of nonlegal social mores. The Article argues that Legal Realism provides the best normative and descriptive theory of the adjudicatory role of labor arbitrators, but rejects its extension to employment arbitration. Instead, they conclude that H.L.A. Hart\u27s version of Legal Positivism provides the best jurisprudential theory for analyzing the personal constraints on arbitrators. Professors Main and Ladenson conclude with an approach to judicial review that preserves the efficiency gains of employment arbitration without sacrificing the public justice goals of statutory and common-law regulation of the employment relationship

The evolution of ethics education: 1980-2015.

Ethics education became an integral part of most U.S. institutions of higher education between 1980 and 2015. Growth can be seen in institutional messaging, number of courses in ethics offered throughout the graduate and undergraduate curricula, national recognition of degrees and certificates granted in ethics by the federal National Center for Educational Statistics, creation of campus-wide ethics centers and co-curricular initiatives, and an explosion of peer-reviewed journals in the intersection of disciplinary areas and ethics. Yet, much research is yet to be done. Connections between ethics education and students’ civic and moral development remain unclear. The impact of ethics education remains unknown. There is no consensus on what counts as effective ethics education. Student voices are largely absent from discussions on the topic. And conversations relating to curricular and co-curricular ethics education continue to be divorced from analysis of the ethical implications of institutional choices