Wednesday, 23 June 2010

Work ethics

Dear reader, our blog has moved to a new address.

Do come on over (and change your bookmarks accordingly):

In our May/June issue, we published a piece by moral philosopher Richard Rowson, author of Working Ethics: How to be Fair in a Culturally Complex World (Jessica Kingsley, 2006). Richard has devised an ethical framework which he believes can help solve employment disputes where religious and ethical beliefs come into conflict with professional duties – think of all the infamous cases involving nurses wearing crosses, registrars refusing to conduct civil partnerships and so on.

Richard's framework has been used in the public sector to resolve such disputes – read his piece from the May issue and let us know what you think.


Anonymous said...

I was hoping the case studies would address the two specific cases mentioned earlier in the piece: the crucifix and the forearms. By applying the framework it would seem that the crucifix should be allowed (like the hijab) whereas the forearms should not be covered (since that would impinge on the duty of care through reducing hygiene). Yet in this case the two rulings are reversed. Any idea why?

(I speak as someone who would personally rather see NO religious garb/symbols in any case, but I can see how the framework outlined is fair.)

Anonymous said...

I have to say I find it not convincing that a police officer who is primarily concerned about her modesty will be able to be to do her work effectively if she puts on a sign saying that she's worth half a man...