The Final Lap~

Okok well, time really flies fast! So fast, and its been nearly two years since I first joined the Bachelor of Business in Accountancy with RMIT. Then, I started to think back from the very first day to now, along the way many valuable things I have experienced or learnt. And for that I want to give thanks to God.

Ok now the impt thing. The reason why I wanna write this post despite me being in the midst of my exams is that I got to practice what is called ethical issues in life. (adopted from the theories from Ethical Issues in Accountancy). Using the AAA model, here's what happened:

Step 1: The Fact >>>> A colleague went on to use Mr X's name w/o his authorisation so that she could sign him up for the D&D as a staff cost at $30 instead of $80. The colleague initially tried to ask Mr X about this but rejected to offer. But subsequently behind, Mr X found out that she used his name the very day before the D&D. And this was actually encouraged by the manager. So what happens, is that this very boyfriend used Mr X's name to go to the D&D and actually won the 11th prize (a iPod classic which cost around $398), then wanted to claim this prize but require Mr X's signature to do so. So w/o choice, she has to ask Mr X to collect it for her. Mr X was initially ok with that, but there were his other working colleagues talking behind his back relating this and made him decided to collect it and decide the matter for himself.

Step 2: The Ethical Issue >>>> Whether to pass the iPod classic to the boyfriend when clearly there was already a breach of rights.

Step 3: Identify The Norms, Values & Principles >>>> If you are going on behalf of someone else, if you won something using that person's name or ID. That person should have a fair share of say in the decision whether he wants to keep the item or decides to give it up. Also whether the objective of the asking is rather clear that it was the iPod where the cost is like above $398, which leads to the self-interest threat, that there is personal gain here.

Step 4: Alternative Source(s) >>>> Mr X could give the iPod to her, Mr X could do an internal whistle blowing and let the management knows about this, Mr X could keep the iPod, Mr X could give the iPod directly to the boyfriend with terms & conditions applied.

Step 5: Reflect On The Values of Each Alternative >>>> If Mr X gave the iPod to her, Mr X would not be defending his rights as she has already breached it already. If Mr X do the whistle blowing, it would allow him to defend his rights, but will harm the rest of the other colleagues because he never knows whether are there more similar situation. If Mr X kept it, then he would be too consider to have self-interest on this matter. If Mr X gave the iPod to the boyfriend, then it maybe considered fair as he is still protecting his rights yet counter-offering with terms & conditions.

Soo... what you think happened then... This is to be continued.. Going to work now.. on 1/2 day.. Watch this space if you wanna know the ending..