I agree that the donor’s intent is key. And it doesn’t sound like you’ll ever know, nor will anyone else at your workplace. People will make their own assumptions, however, and in all probability they won’t all match yours.
So, even though you yourself would have given the tickets without a thought to what happened to them after that, other people are going to think “I’d be pissed if I gave company X those tickets and someone sold them on eBay”, which will color how they view your attempting to get them. I think it would be sensible to recognize that such a reaction from some fraction of your coworkers is likely, and decide if the potential benefits are worth dealing with it, rather than only focusing on this as an abstract ethical issue. (Although doing the latter definitely made for an interesting thread.)
Wow, it actually makes me really sad that there are people in the world who think like that. Others on this thread have explained why that attitude is so wrong in more eloquent ways than I can.
If you live in a vacuum, then it’s hard to argue with what you said. Yeah, in a vacuum, there’s nothing wrong with selling what you’ve won, or trying to win something so you can sell it.
But very few of us live in a vacuum, and it’s been made clear that in this case, the giver of the tickets had the intent of giving the gift of going to the game; he did not intend to give the gift of making someone slightly richer.
So the way I see it, outside of the vacuum, to try to win the tickets with the intent of selling them is just spitting in the face of the giver of the tickets, because you’re clearly way outside of the “spirit” of the giving.
I’m definitely on the side of the posters who do have a problem with selling the tickets, and I personally wouldn’t consider selling them or even entering the drawing if I couldn’t use or wasn’t interested in using them myself. If a co-worker of mine put in for a similar free raffle, with their only intent being to sell the “prize”, I’d be at least mildly annoyed, but probably not really hold it against them. I am also of the opinion that although it isn’t explicitly stated that the tickets are only intended for the winner to use (by use I mean attend the event, not sell), I think its reasonable to assume that is the general implication.
I do understand the arguments made about the logic of this situation, and agree that if you strictly evaluate this logically, or “on paper”, there is no problem with selling the tickets, and really no distinction between selling them or using them oneself. But, in reality I don’t think matters of courtesy or doing the right thing always follow logically. In my mind, if I picture a hypothetical co-worker selling a prize such as this, and then defending it logically, I also find it easy to picture them trying to determine logically why they have few friends or why no one really likes them. It may not make sense to some people, but that’s just the way it is.
For me it came down to the potential damage to my career that could come from this. First, the donor might get a little miffed at his gift being auctioned off to the highest bidder when he meant it as a gift to the agency as a whole. Second, considering the preponderance of rabid Illini fans in the office, it seems natural to expect that someone would want a detailed description of how the game was, and when I told them I’d sold the tickets, they’d raise a stink.
One reason that he is entitled to get the tickets without the intention of using them is that the company shouldn’t be considered “raffling tickets”. They should be raffling “something of value”. That’s either the value of going to the game, or the monetary value someone else places on going to the game.
If there were 2 people in the office who were into sewing, and someone donated a golden pincushion, should those two people be the only 2 to enter the raffle.
Clearly if someone was raffling a car, it would almsot be expected that they would sell it.
Also, what if the OP had tickets already to the game? Could he win these, and sell his other tickets because these are better?
Furthermore, I don’t consider this rude like in the scenarios hajario outlined. Whether he sells the tickets, or goes to the game himself, a raffle loser is no more put out than he was before.
So, I don’t see an ethical problem with it, but it’s not at ‘0’ on the “ethical” scale either.
However, it is easy to see why other people would have a problem with it. And, since you work and socialize with these people, I think that that is the determining factor here. I wouldn’t enter the raffle.
Here’s another analogy that might make it clearer.
Sometimes I give gifts to people because I want to give them a gift. I hope that I pick something they want, but if not, I am fine with their exchanging or selling or regifting it. The gift was purchased for the express purpose of giving to them, and I want them to get what they can out of it.
Sometimes I give gifts to people because I happen to have something that I don’t need or want, but I think someone else might. In that case, it’s not uncommon for me to try ask a few people if they want the item, in the hopes of finding someone who does. Now, it would certainly be possible for someone to accept everything I give away like this, and go sell it on eBay. But I’d pretty quickly stop offering gifts to them. If I had wanted to just sell it, I could have done that.
It seems to me that the situation with the employer is much more similar to the latter. The employer didn’t specifically buy something to reward an employee, it found itself with something of value, and tried to give it to someone who would get good use out of it. Accepting it (entering your name) when you have no intention of using it is uncouth.