1

Arianna Green

What Good Does Testing Do?

OGL 345, Chapter 6/Module 2

September 3, 2023

Dimension 1: Define the ethical Challenges

a) As the EVP of this organization, we cannot go around randomly drug testing our

employees without any suspicion. To even gain that suspicion, we would need reasoning

behind it, for instance that it is affecting that person’s ability to work coherently. This is

where we hit our ethical dilemma. An ethical dilemma can be defined as, “when a

situation requires a choice in which both options have ethical implications, leaving you

with no clear right or wrong decision,” (Fugate, 2022, p. 6). If there were suspicions of an

employee using drugs while on the job, how we went about drug testing them would also

have to ensure that there is absolutely no discrimination at all against them, as well as

letting them know that we are only doing this to make sure everyone in the company

stays safe. Discrimination alone can be defined or described as “… negative or unwanted

actions taken against a group of employees based on membership in one of the nine

protected classes …,” (Fugate, 2022, p. 106).

b) This is a current problem in our company because we want to ensure the safety of all

our workers/employees. For example, if one of our employees was hurt on the job, and

under the influence of (a) drug(s), this could easily turn into an ethical and legal liability

on the company (Nagele-Piazza, 2021). An ethical liability is being “accountable for their

own ethical conduct and that of those they manage, work with, influence, or witness,”
2

(Fugate, 2022, p. 137). Legally liable is defined as, “… the compulsory and adverse legal

consequences assumed by people who commit illegal acts,” (Fugate, 2022, p. 137).

c) We do and cannot have our employees under the influence of any drug or have it in

their system while working for our organization due to their safety, and our own.

d) A stakeholder can be defined as “any entity that can affect or is affected by your

personal conduct or that of your organization (Fugate, 2022, p. 9). Types of stakeholders

that could be affected by this are our customers, consumers, employees, shareholders, and

even the organization itself.

Dimension 2: Determine the causes

a) Let’s start with the Ethical decision-making approach with our employees first. Those

who prioritize their personal wants, such as using drugs, over their obligations to the

organization and the safety of their coworkers may be more likely to have worse ethical

decision-making skills. Other executives and I, although if we (the executives) act

unethically or do not set a high ethical standard, staff may believe that there is a lack of

concern for their safety, which could minimize the significance of following drug-free

regulations. There is also a difference in work values between the employees of any

organization and their executives. For example, employees who put a low priority on

safety or who put their own interests ahead of their loyalty to the company may be more

prone to engage in risky behaviors, such working while intoxicated. On the flip side,

executives prioritize productivity and performance over safety, staff members may feel

under pressure to reach goals regardless of their physical or mental condition, which

increases the risk of drug use at the workplace.

3

b) There is context that led to this problem within my workplace throughout the country.

For example, in many states throughout the US now, marijuana is legal for recreational

and medicinal use, and in those states is where my company is located as well (Nagele-

Piazza, 2021). With marijuana being one of the drugs that could cause liability within my

organization, this is a hard game to play. Although I know the facts on how marijuana

can help with certain medical conditions and/or pain, I do not want to allow it into my

workplace because of the threat of injury if one of my employees is using it. I also want

my employees to feel that their work environment supports them as well and I do not

want to discriminate any of my employees for their recreational use in those states that it

is legal, but the safety of the organization must come first.

Dimension 3: Describe your potential solutions and the intended and unintended consequences

for Stakeholders.

a) I want my employees to be able to be comfortable and happy about coming to work, so

termination would not be a solution in this problem. One of the possible solutions is

coming up with a personal message/email to send out to all my employees regarding this

problem and how we should maneuver around it. I would imply that when using

marijuana for recreational use, to not use it before coming to work as that is and would be

a liability issue. If there was reasoning to believe/proof that one of my employees did

come into the job intoxicated, they would be immediately terminated. On the other hand,

I would start once a month drug testing for the whole company if/when applicable.

b) I would go about this situation/problem the way I am currently because I want to make

sure that I am doing everything I can to make sure this is ethically and morally right. I

also want to lead as an ethical leader, which is described as, “using appropriate means to
4

influence others toward an appropriate goal,” (Fugate, 2022, 127). Based on this

information as well, I would want to be more of a deontologist or have more of that

perspective for my organization. Deontologists can be defined as those who “make

ethical decisions based on moral principles of what is right and wrong, and they give

primary attention to the intentions or motives of their actions rather than the

consequences (Fugate, 2022, p. 31).

c) The new policies may at first cause discomfort or opposition among the staff. Some

people could feel that the harsher rules violate their right to personal preference. As the

employees become accustomed to the policies and recognize the company's dedication to

safety, they may feel more confident and have higher morale. Increased job satisfaction

and improved general well-being can result from a safer workplace. For our executives

and leaders, in the short run, these regulations' implementation and enforcement may

necessitate more resources and work. Employees who object to the changes may oppose

some leaders' initiatives. Executives and leaders may observe a decline in workplace

mishaps and associated legal problems in the long run. Increased employee confidence in

management, an improved company reputation, and perhaps decreased insurance costs

can all result from this. For my organization, it might encounter some disruptions during

the first adoption of new policies, including possible employee resistance and the

requirement to spend money on training and outreach initiatives. In the long run,

although, the company is probably going to experience increased safety metrics and

fewer drug-related accidents. This may lead to increased output, decreased absenteeism,

and decreased turnover rates.

5

d) Some unintended consequences of the solutions could include that employee morale

could suffer because of this perception of the policies as being unduly restrictive, and

management might come to be viewed with suspicion. Employees could also be reluctant

to disclose drug-related problems out of concern for retaliation if supervisors come across

as being unduly severe or critical. Having to submit to a drug test may make some

workers feel stigmatized or unfairly singled out, which could create a toxic work

environment, if not tended to immediately.

e) Other implications for stakeholders could include that the stricter regulations could

spark talks or disagreements over their implementation if labor unions perceive them as

potential violations of employees' rights. Teams from legal and compliance departments

may need to make sure the new rules and procedures comply with all applicable laws,

including those pertaining to employee rights and labor regulations. To provide a safe

workplace, health and safety departments will probably need to supervise the application

of the policies, carry out training, and check compliance.

f) While these answers are comprehensive, it's crucial to remember that they will only

work effectively if they are put into practice correctly, are continually reinforced, and are

adjusted to any new problems that could crop up. To guarantee the long-term efficacy of

the chosen solutions, continuous monitoring, feedback, and change are necessary. The

possibility for the suggested solutions to greatly reduce or even completely eradicate the

causes of drug use at work seems to be supported by the ethical analysis and the

likelihood of addressing causes. The company may cultivate an atmosphere where

employees are more inclined to make moral choices that put safety first by fostering a
6

culture of safety, enforcing transparent policies, providing education, and displaying

ethical leadership.
7

References

Fugate, M. (2020). Managing Business Ethics And Your Career. SAGE

Nagele-Piazza, L. (2021, July 7). Workplace Drug Testing: Weighing the pros and cons. SHRM.

https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/legal-and-compliance/state-and-local-updates/

pages/the-pros-and-cons-of-workplace-drug-testing.aspx