Jamilah Colleen Y.

Bautista
BSBA Financial Management and Accounting
BACC104_N5

CASE 2 DECISION TO MAKE

Delfin is a newly hired administrative clerk of Responsible

Tobacco Corporation. He just attended a two-day seminar on

Interactive Management in Quezon City. They were given allowance

and hotel accommodation funds for the seminar and are expected to

liquidate the expenses once they return to their office in Naga

City.

After the seminar, Delfin and Jeyser were already busy packing

for their trip to Naga City at 9:00 pm. Jeyser, an account

executive for five years, open the topic on their expenses. He

said it was okay to pad their expenses especially those without

receipts. Anyway, the finance department was not very strict on

those without receipts. However, Delfin was very hesitant on

agreeing to Jeyser because it is dishonest and he hated that

feeling. But Jeyser said that if he did not do it, the company

might compare the two sets of expenses from both of them and they

might find out that he was padding his expenses.

If Delfin is honest in this situation, the finance department

will have an idea of the whole padding thing, and it turned out

that it was the practice of the rest of the employees. Delfin

might be opening the Pandora’s box.

Guide Question:

What do you think should Delfin do in this situation? Discuss

your answer. (You can use Kantian Ethics, John Rawl’s Principles

of Justice, the Moral Positivism of Hobbes, Divine Command Ethics

or Ethical Egoism of Ayn Rand to support your answer.)

It seems to me that if Kantian ethics applies in this

situation, Delfin would not agree to the statement of Jeyser to

pad the expenses especially those without receipts. He must stand

of what kind of person he is and he was not able to do anything

against to his principle as a person. Delfin’s action must

conform to the moral law which is the right thing to do no matter

what happen or consequence to his actions as well as he has a

motive to do so. Goodwill to Kant was for a natural beings follow

their duty and act in accordance with moral law, claiming that

Delfin is good in itself or morally good saving someone’s life is

good in itself. It is also means to an end that something is good

for something else therefore, if Delfin follow his duty to act

that fits with moral law and have a motive to influence other

people to do what is right and change their thinking and treat

them as ends and never simply as means to Delfin’s end.

In terms of John Rawl’s Principles of Justice if it applies

to Delfin’s situation I think Delfin will not agree to the idea

of Jeyser because Rawl’s principle of justice though it is

focused on how to create a society that was just and fair since

it is said in the context that the finance department will have

an idea of the whole padding thing, and it turned out that it was

the practice of the rest of the employees if he will honest. On

the other hand, Delfin is entitled to basic freedoms such as a

freedom of speech, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness as well

as the fair value of political liberties regardless of their

social class therefore, Delfin have a choice to stand to her

honesty or equality within a society as long as it makes the

worst person better.

On the other hand, the Moral Positivism of Hobbes construed

more broadly as a way of looking at the world from the vantage

point of scientific method and holds to the belief that only

those objects or events that can be experienced directly should

be the object of scientific inquiry. In this situation, Delfin

have the objective to think jeyser the way he thinks. He believe

that there is a room for a positivity that people change the way

they act and the motive in accordance with moral law. Jeyser and

other employees who are doing the padding for expenses have a

better thinking if Delfin will push through his motive to

employees around. He will be the role model of honesty in their

company no matter what the result is as long as he stands for

what is right and morally good for him and to other people.

If Ethical Egoism of Ayn Rand applies to this situation,

Delfin will do the same in support to this claim some of Rand’s

virtues are quite different from those of, say, Aristotle, who

was nevertheless a significant influence on Rand’s work. It sees

all altruism as involving self-sacrifice, and thus as unethical.

Acting against one’s own interest by giving up values does not

promote one’s chances of survival and prosperity, and survival is

the reason for which ethics exist, and why they are important to

follow (Rand 1964). Delfin action requires one’s awareness of

both ethical principles and that which would be rational for

oneself. One has to acknowledge objective reality and to act

based on that acknowledgement. In order to survive and to thrive,

humans need value from things that is beneficial to social

relationships. She also believes that only when one follows

virtues by nature, having internalized them, one is truly

virtuous (Rand 1957). Being virtuous is a choice made for life,

not just for a singular situation, and following virtues makes

one more likely to thrive and prosper.

Source: Relloso, Juan Raul (2017). Business Ethics & Social

Responsibility. Ateneo University Press.