What should Cal do? What are the consequences of the options?

Question

As an executive in a mid-sized manufacturing firm, Cal finds himself thrown together with Harry, who works for a division of the firm that Cal supervises. He and Harry are in the same community; their children are in the same schools; they often show up at the same social functions; and they play golf together fairly frequently.

One day, to Cal's deep dismay, he hears that Harry has been implicated in some financial irregularities at work. The issues while serious leave some room for doubt. There is reason to think Harry got ensnared by regulations, though he may have afterwards tried to cover up that entanglement by being less than forthright. Yet after what Cal observes to be a careful audit and investigation, Harry is let go from his job.

Harry comes to Cal and asks for a letter of recommendation.

Answer 1

Cal is facing a dilemma of being loyal to Harry or being forthright and honest about the situation. From a deontology approach, Cal must be truthful in any letter. From Act Utilitarianism the "best" end result may be to help Harry find another job and disguise the truth. Rule Utilitarianism would hold that it is not right to lie, as would Rights Theory. The universal perspective asks Cal to consider how he would feel if another employer wrote a dishonest letter to Cal and he hired Harry as a result. From a virtue approach, Cal will need to put himself in the position of the new employer hiring Harry and what he would want to know about Harry. All of these could be related to Kohlberg's stages of moral development also.

The consequences of these options is that Harry could obtain a job based upon Cal's recommendation. If Harry again is again found implicated in financial irregularities and if the new job found out that Cal knew, Cal's reputation will be harmed. This is a situation where empathy helps in that Cal should put himself in the position of a prospective employer of Harry. Still, it is oftentimes difficult to say something negative about an associate or friend. Some in Cal's position might inform a prospective employer that Harry was let go because of differences and leave it at that. It is kind of a half-truth that sometimes dictates the action out of loyalty to another or stage 3 reasoning rather than to view one's responsibilities to society (another firm), which requires stage 4 thinking or above.