Even More Ethics - Wk3

Even More Ethics - Wk3 - Interesting read this week guys A...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: Interesting read this week, guys. A couple of things bother me, here. What kind of store is this when there are two department managers (implying they are peers) working in the same store and one manager needs another’s to get a promotion? Peer review? That doesn’t make much sense to me; that should be a competitive atmosphere more than a subordinate one. What also bothered me was the implication that Angie was guilty. It’s fairly clear that something is amiss, but baseless charges are worse than being labeled a “goody-goody”. While we’re on the topic of things that don’t make sense, why does Neal have a last name, but Angie doesn’t? Are they husband and wife? Brother and sister? That’s awkward. Anyway, on to the real question. Was Neal justified? Not a chance. I was morally disturbed by his reaction, although I see it every day. Neal’s character and apparent lack of any sort of intestinal fortitude really annoyed me as I read through the situation a number of times, and certain things became clear. So I went to my good friend, the Dictionary, for respite. Here is what I found: hon·or- noun- \ ˈ ä-n r\ : ə a keen sense of ethical conduct : INTEGRITY <a man of honor > (nice segue) in·teg·ri·ty- noun...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 08/06/2011 for the course ACCT 300 taught by Professor Snow during the Spring '11 term at American Public University.

Page1 / 2

Even More Ethics - Wk3 - Interesting read this week guys A...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online