Businesswoman fires employee for having an affair with friend's husband. Unethical? Wise?

[Antinor01]

@Czarcasm

What if the husband actively seduced her?

So what? She still made the decision to do it.

[silenus]

@Antinor01

So what? She still made the decision to do it.

Exactly. If it wasn’t rape, then she made a bad decision that cost her her job.

Both ethical and wise.

[Tastes_of_Chocolate]

@Skald_the_Rhymer

I feel obliged to point that that, while Sharon is participating in an affair, she herself is not the one cheating. Or, at least, there’s nothing in the OP to indicate that Sharon is married. She’s broken no vows, and I am not convinced that her willingness to abet another’s infidelity indicates that she’s likely to embezzle, discriminate racially, or otherwise abuse her position. If Lauren had learned that Sharon had been, say, stealing from her elderly parents, then clearly Sharon would be a risk not worth keeping, but being the other woman is a different matter.

So the driver of a get-away car shouldn’t be found guilty, since they didn’t rob the bank? If Sharon knew that Jackson was married, then Sharon did participate in an infidelity. Lauren had every right to fire her. If you can’t trust your employees, why keep them employed?

[Czarcasm]

@Tastes_of_Chocolate

So the driver of a get-away car shouldn’t be found guilty, since they didn’t rob the bank? If Sharon knew that Jackson was married, then Sharon did participate in an infidelity. Lauren had every right to fire her. If you can’t trust your employees, why keep them employed?

Should that be a wide-spread company policy, then?

[Dallas_Jones]

Completely ethical to fire her.

It is covered under the doctrine, or law of "Don’t Shit Where You Eat."

Urban Dictionary: Don't shit where you eat

[Rachellelogram]

It’s not unethical.

[Boozahol_Squid_P.I]

@Skald_the_Rhymer

I don’t do shenanigans. You’re confusing me with Evil!Skald, but I’m not wearing that hat right now. I can prove it logically. Anywho, I actually did consider making this an all-lesbian story, but decided not to because it would complicate the Lauren-Melissa part of it.

I doubt Lauren is going to find issues of incompetence to use as a bat to fire Melissa with; the OP says she only recently sang her praises. But does she actually needs grounds to fire Melissa other than the fact that Melissa just royally pissed her off? Is it your contention that Melissa is owed a job?

As for your pie: I am not your teleport service provider, and I have urged you ere this to use someone other than Quark for that service. I have no sympathy whatsodamnever.

Given that there isn’t a suggestion that Lauren is involved in the tom-foolery going on here, I don’t see what effect making all the characters lesbians would have, beyond increasing the resale rights to parody adult-movie makers.

I certainy don’t think Melissa is owed a job, and if Lauren is in the legal clear, she should just can her butt. But if we’re worried about the ethical consequences, Lauren has a responsibility to the other 5 partners in the Inn business to make sure the business isn’t damaged by her actions. Also, there’s always something that can be used as an excuse to change your evaluations of an employee if you look hard enough, even with an exemplary employee.

And finally, you say on the one hand that you’re not wearing your Evil!Skald hat, but on the other, that you won’t deliver delicious pie to me? I’m beginning to doubt your narrative reliability!

[Doug_K]

@Skald_the_Rhymer

I feel obliged to point that that, while Sharon is participating in an affair, she herself is not the one cheating. Or, at least, there’s nothing in the OP to indicate that Sharon is married. She’s broken no vows, and I am not convinced that her willingness to abet another’s infidelity indicates that she’s likely to embezzle, discriminate racially, or otherwise abuse her position.

It takes two to cheat. If he’s the only one married, then they are both cheating his wife. If Sharon is married then they are both cheating both spouses. The only way she wouldn’t be just as guilty would be if she didn’t know he was married, which is not the case here.

[Skald_the_Rhymer]

@silenus

Exactly. If it wasn’t rape, then she made a bad decision that cost her her job.

Both ethical and wise.

And it clearly wasn’t rape; Sharon says that she and Jackson are in love.

Czarcasm, why would it matter if Jackson seduced her?

@phouka

Totally ethical.

If she’ll screw (physically) her boss’s husband, she’ll screw (financially) her boss, her customers, and anyone else who comes along. Besides which, now that the husband has left, Sharon has incentive to quit and do some serious damage on the way out - steal customer lists, sabotage projects, spread lies - in order to cover her own feelings of guilt or shame, delay competition while she tries to set up her own business, or out of some misplaced sense of persecution.

Besides which, someone who has the chutzpah to say “that’s not fair; you can’t fire me for sleeping with your husband!” is not a person you want working in a job where they have to interact with other human beings at all.

It’s not only ethical, it’s absolutely necessary if Melissa wants to protect her business and her reputation.

Nitpick: Melissa didn’t fire anyone, or even request a firing. I’m not sure I agree that Sharon’s willingness to be the other woman means that she herself is financially dishonest. People aren’t just one thing. Martin Luther King was a hero in the social arena while being systematically unfaithful. Ulysses Grant may have been a perfect husband, but he was a disaster as president.

@Boozahol_Squid_P.I

Given that there isn’t a suggestion that Lauren is involved in the tom-foolery going on here, I don’t see what effect making all the characters lesbians would have, beyond increasing the resale rights to parody adult-movie makers.

I certainy don’t think Melissa is owed a job, and if Lauren is in the legal clear, she should just can her butt. But if we’re worried about the ethical consequences, Lauren has a responsibility to the other 5 partners in the Inn business to make sure the business isn’t damaged by her actions.

[op not poster]
You’re right about her responsibility to her other partners, which is why I included that bit in the scenario.

[poster not op]
Of course, it’s possible (though not certain) that Lauren + Melissa = a controlling share in the business, and of course Sharon is the manager of a single inn, not the whole network. Seems unlikely that Sharon is the only person capable of running that inn well. It’s virtually certain that, if Lauren didn’t fire Sharon immediately, she was going to spend months fighting not to garrote her.

It’s kind of a circular argument, but the biggest reason to fire Sharon, methinks, is that Sharon was monumentally stupid in not realizing that fucking her boss’s best friend’s husband was going to lead to her getting fired. While I still don’t think think that Sharon’s behavior betrays a general tendency towards dishonesty, I think it exposes terrible judgment.

Fine,

And finally, you say on the one hand that you’re not wearing your Evil!Skald hat, but on the other, that you won’t deliver delicious pie to me? I’m beginning to doubt your narrative reliability!

Fine. I’ll load up the pie-cannons. I’m 49.99999999999999999999999999999999999999999 % sure I’ve fixed the bug that led to that unfortunate incident last month that put what’s-his-name in intensive care.

@Doug_K

It takes two to cheat. If he’s the only one married, then they are both cheating his wife. If Sharon is married then they are both cheating both spouses. The only way she wouldn’t be just as guilty would be if she didn’t know he was married, which is not the case here.

I’d no more be the other man than I’d cheat on my wife, but the sins are not identical. Persons aren’t property. Sharon hasn’t betrayed any vows to Melissa.

[Boozahol_Squid_P.I]

@Skald_the_Rhymer

It’s kind of a circular argument, but the biggest reason to fire Sharon, methinks, is that Sharon was monumentally stupid in not realizing that fucking her boss’s best friend’s husband was going to lead to her getting fired. While I still don’t think think that Sharon’s behavior betrays a general tendency towards dishonesty, I think it exposes terrible judgment.

It exposes terrible personal judgment, but that really doesn’t necessarily reflect anything about Sharon’s business conduct. If Sharon has been such a model employee so far (beyond shagging Jacko) then this single instance probably doesn’t suggest that in a completely emotionless enviroment that she should be fired at all.

That’s all just preliminary to say that the single biggest reason to fire Sharon is because she pissed Lauren off. I just don’t see why that’s an unethical reason to fire her.

[Saint_Cad]

@Boozahol_Squid_P.I

but because the poor judgment displayed by Sharon dipping her quill in the company ink.

IANABiologist but isn’t Jackson the quill and Sharon the inkpot?

[StGermain]

What about Ginger?

StG

[Boozahol_Squid_P.I]

@Saint_Cad

IANABiologist but isn’t Jackson the quill and Sharon the inkpot?

I can’t be sure; you never know what that cad Jackson is into these days.

[Skald_the_Rhymer]

@StGermain

What about Ginger?

StG

Huh?

If you’re talking about my employee from that thread a few months back, she didn’t get the job.

[StGermain]

@Skald_the_Rhymer

Huh?

If you’re talking about my employee from that thread a few months back, she didn’t get the job.

Poop. I’m been mentally crossing my fingers for months. It’s been exhausting, I tell you! Hopefully she’ll have something bigger and better coming up - you’ve said twice what a valuable employee she is.

StG

[Otara]

I guess one possible unwise aspect is whether this was what Melissa wanted, and what the policies are regarding firing people, ie whether she has discretion.

This potentially is something done for personal revenge that has a large flowon effect to employees, partners, customers etc, and yet she didnt consult anyone over even how her termination was to be done. What if all the other shareholders didnt want her fired or wanted it to be done differently?

In my view she had at least a responsibility to consult, particularly given the personal angle.

Otara

[Skald_the_Rhymer]

@Otara

I guess one possible unwise aspect is whether this was what Melissa wanted, and what the policies are regarding firing people, ie whether she has discretion.

I’m not sure Melissa’s desires were even in play. Melissa didn’t know who the other woman was. The OP says Lauren didn’t consult her partners (and, as managing partner, may not need to), so it’s possible she didn’t tell Melissa that she knows whom Jackson is banging.

ETA: And, honestly, I think the people saying Sharon should’ve expected this to happen are right. Have an affair with one of your bosses’ spouses? That’s a firing, particularly when the ultimate boss is the best friend of the cuckolded party. It’s implied by the last three million years of human evolution, right after we split from the bonobos.

[Otara]

She may not ‘need’ to, but with issues like this its not always smart to rely on that.

Relying on it not being found out wouldnt be particularly clever either.

Otara

[Skald_the_Rhymer]

@Otara

She may not ‘need’ to, but with issues like this its not always smart to rely on that.

Relying on it not being found out wouldnt be particularly clever either.

Otara

Hmm? Where do you get the idea Lauren is trying not to be found out? For that matter, why would she even care?

[kayaker]

I love me some sweet potato pie, still warm from the oven.