Security Guard
Action of Security Guard
Do you feel the security guard took the right action? Would you have taken the same action? Why or why not?
Mr. Tuff, having had a four-year stint in the Marine Corps as a policeman, is still a fairly young and inexperienced person in the business world. The military is very strict when it comes to their procedures and policies and Mr. Tuff, now having firsthand knowledge in following rules, is using his experience to enable him to pursue a job as a security guard.
It seems Mr. Tuff had immediate and really strong opinions regarding the changes the security company was implementing and how it would affect his license. I don 't think he should have been quite as vocal right off the bat, and especially to impose his opinions to other security guards. He went to Mr. Hernandez, his immediate supervisor, regarding his take on the handling of a drunken person and how he thought it was in violation of his license. Mr. Hernandez gave him a good directive, to "contact the supervisor in charge, who would make the decision" to cover this major concern. (Beauchamp/Bowie, 2005, pg. 319). Although Mr. Hernandez made an off-handed remark regarding the actions of drunks, and some remarks about Mr. Tuff 's behavior since the policy change, his directive was still an answer to Mr. Tuff 's concern. The back of the license states " we will obey all lawful orders and rules and regulations pertaining to security officers " (Beauchamp/Bowie, 2005, pg. 318). Even later when a Sergeant from the Police Department concurred with Mr. Tuff 's opinion regarding license requirements, it was never brought out that contacting his immediate supervisor for a decision at the time of an incident, that the decision wouldn 't be to not contact the Police, which would thereby not be in violation of and/or following the terms of the manual or license. If the supervisor made a decision to not contact the Police, and some form of an incident did occur, the Police
Do you feel the security guard took the right action? Would you have taken the same action? Why or why not?
Mr. Tuff, having had a four-year stint in the Marine Corps as a policeman, is still a fairly young and inexperienced person in the business world. The military is very strict when it comes to their procedures and policies and Mr. Tuff, now having firsthand knowledge in following rules, is using his experience to enable him to pursue a job as a security guard.
It seems Mr. Tuff had immediate and really strong opinions regarding the changes the security company was implementing and how it would affect his license. I don 't think he should have been quite as vocal right off the bat, and especially to impose his opinions to other security guards. He went to Mr. Hernandez, his immediate supervisor, regarding his take on the handling of a drunken person and how he thought it was in violation of his license. Mr. Hernandez gave him a good directive, to "contact the supervisor in charge, who would make the decision" to cover this major concern. (Beauchamp/Bowie, 2005, pg. 319). Although Mr. Hernandez made an off-handed remark regarding the actions of drunks, and some remarks about Mr. Tuff 's behavior since the policy change, his directive was still an answer to Mr. Tuff 's concern. The back of the license states " we will obey all lawful orders and rules and regulations pertaining to security officers " (Beauchamp/Bowie, 2005, pg. 318). Even later when a Sergeant from the Police Department concurred with Mr. Tuff 's opinion regarding license requirements, it was never brought out that contacting his immediate supervisor for a decision at the time of an incident, that the decision wouldn 't be to not contact the Police, which would thereby not be in violation of and/or following the terms of the manual or license. If the supervisor made a decision to not contact the Police, and some form of an incident did occur, the Police
References: Beauchamp, T.L., Bowie, N.E., (Custom Ed), 2005, Ethical Theory and Business, Pearson/Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ. Nixon Peabody LLP. E L infonet.com. National Labor Relations Act Is Not A General Whistleblowers ' Statute. Retrieved January 19, 2006 from http://www.elinfonet.com/fedarticles/7/1.