Business Ethics and Sex

[LindaC]

OK, Paula(Ire), I'm going to try to summarize this article I read this morning in the LA Times. It struck my fancy, and although Margaret Carlson says it much better than I could, here goes:

The jist of Ms. Carlson's editorial is that while several CEO's of late have been summarily dismissed from their lofty posts for engaging in sexual affairs, these same Boards of Directors have been much slower to mete out swift justice for much greater sins such as lying to and cheating the public. Case in point is Boeing Chief (at least until very recently) Harry Stonecipher. The board was veeerrrry slow to recognize wrongdoing getting very important government contracts with inside help from someone in the Pentagon, but acted swiftly to kick out the rascal for having an affair with a subordinate.

Sex sells, apparently, much more than lying and stealing. A question of ethics, yes, but the hierarchy of ethics here, methinks, is a tad skewed.

Linda

P.S.: If this link doesn't work, I'll be happy to post the text.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-carlson17mar17,0,1835332.column

[Debra the Bassplayer]

Dear Linda,
It is amazing to me that there can be liars and thieves that walk away with a slap on the hand, Tom Delay et al, but when it comes to sex involved...whoa watch out. It takes forethought and chinanagry (sp?) to be a liar and a thief...a concerted effort if you will. Sexual dalliance only requires foreplay, instead of forethought *humor* and is much more accessible, and sadly much more acceptable in the business world (and good old boys clubs) than we would ever care to believe. So we punish those that act on sexual base urges and not those that scheme and plot, right? Something terribly wrong with this picture.
I think it is the false moral mind set that has swept up our national conscience that has given this the nod and allowed this to happen.
Mind you, I don't agree with sexual dalliances at all, nor do I agree with adultery, but when a country mindfully excuses a liar and thief who rape the savings and future from the common people, where is the morality in that?
Thanks for the opinion and article Linda.
Love,
Debra

[LindaC]

Dear Debra,

If a little "forthought" was applied before "foreplay" began, there would be a lot less "dalliance"! Thanks for that visual!

Love,

Linda

[janiep]

Well I went to the article because I felt I did need a bit more indepth look at what was being said here.I am assuming this to be a non-partisan criticism here.Correct me if I am wrong and we are meaning only to be judgemental of Republicans who have committed adultery or "dalliance".At any rate here is my criticism.From my standpoint as a Christian[here she goes again],bear with me becasue I nbelieve this is important to the issue.Since we are speaking of mores and obedience to the 10 Commandments as published by Moses way back when.I.E>stealing[thou shalt not],lying[thou shalt not] adultery[also thou shalt not].It would seem to me taken from this standpoint one is no less important than the other when we are talking about people in leadership.Whether it be in the home,the church, city,county,state or federal leadership or businesses we need men and women of high moral standards.The Bible makes that clear that a righteous[upstanding]nation shall be exalted.Obviouslt this has not been the standard for many many years.Both Republican and Democratic parties are guilty of having immoral leadership in office.A sisn is a sin is a sin..so to speak.Sexual sins,lying,cheating,stealing are all to be abhhored...and as the Bible says..judgement mus first begin at the house of God..the Church..I do not mean simply a denominiation or organizatioin with a name on it such as Catholic,or Jewish Synagogue or Baptist,or Assembly of God...but each and every individual within that larger body the church universal.We all need to look to ourselves and remove the beam that is in our own eye and then elect officials whether they be government or businesses upright men and women who will run the business of our country and financial affairs with integrity in every aspect of our lives.I believe our children need heroes and examples of men and women who are not liars,cheats adulterers,.Sadly even the heroes of yesteryear such as our atheletes, who once were role models are now lying before grand juries about their use of steroids or gambling addictions or shooting one another...the music of the rappers,the entertainment industry feeding them with constant rebellion..the heroes are the cops who are liars,cheats or the rebellious ones who go against authority..these are the" heroes" our children and grandchildren are growing up with learning to emulate.Is it no wonder we have are having a backlash of violence on the streets,in the schools,even in the classroom[re:the story of the 11 yr old girl forced to commit oral sex on 4 6th graders while a movie was being shown in her class with the teacher present!].
Well I really did go off on a tangent with this one Linda..but since you asked!
Getting back to the immediate question..yes I do believe sexual "misconduct" is as every bit as important an issue as lying,stealing etc..because I disagree with the premise that it only hurts a few...all of society is injured by leaders who not only commit adultery and sexual indescretions but also by their lying and cheating and stealing and any other sin that does so easily beset them...God very clearly states that those in any form of leadership ..more is required of them..for the very reason that they are looked up to and emulated.
One womans perspective,
Love,
Janie

[LindaC]

Dear Janie,

I don't think the article was partisan at all. I don't even know the politics of Mr. Stonecipher, nor do I care. Adultery is the same sin for Republicans and Democrats (not to mention all other lesser political parties!).

I would not argue with you or the Bible on this issue. I don't approve of adultery either. But in the context of running a business, I don't think all ethics are equal. I don't think, for instance, that the stockholders of Worldcom or Enron would have been equally harmed if Ken Lay or the other crook - er - CEO, had merely indulged in adultery while on the job. So, I do think there are bigger sins here, like "hitting the numbers" and lying to investors and stockholders.

As a purely personal matter, adultery is every bit as reprehensible to me as lying and stealing. I think we agree in principal here Janie!

Love,

Linda

[janiep]

Well lying and cheating are against the law..adultery isn't so they don't prosecute for that..so the CEO who lies and cheats[Enron,Worldcom,Martha Stewart..etc..]are prosecuted the others are fired...I hear you and I understand ...I was hoping no partisan politics was coming into play..it's just the article mentioned some famous Republicans without mentioning some equally if not more famous Democrats reagrding their sexual misconduct so my sensitive antennae was coming out..at any rate I do feel it is important to put integrity in all aspects back into our society and on that I know you do agree,
Love,
janie

[LindaC]

Absolutely Janie. I'm all for demanding honesty and integrity in business, as well as in private life, and letting CEO's get away with adultery or any other breach of ethics, while on the job, is not acceptable to me. I suppose it would be too much to ask that these same ethics apply to politicians as well!

And whenever you need an example of a "famous Democrat" engaging in "sexual misconduct", you can always invoke Bill Clinton (or Jack Kennedy)! It goes both ways, for sure Janie! I can't claim the moral high ground for Democrats either!

Love,

Linda

[Clara]

Hi Linda,

I think I agree with everything everyone has said here. Personal integrity, social integrity, and business integrity are all important.

Sex definitely sells, although it's my understanding that it wasn't just Harry's affair that lead to his heave-ho, but that his lack of personal integrity also included some lack of business ethics. I know what you're saying though......

I think a lack of personal integrity, such as having an affair, is less complicated and easier to identify. We all understand it.

As for business ethics, I was glad to see Mr. Ebbers convicted yesterday. I've always thought that the buck should stop at the top.

And social ethics also seem more difficult to identify than personal integrity. Some politicians lack social ethics. They don't always do what is right for the people of this country. They do what they need to do to get elected or re-elected. That's the way our system seems to work. Frustrating!!!

Interesting topic.
love,Clara

[janiep]

See how much we agree lately
Love to you Linda...how's the weather down your way?..we had some gorgeous stuff last week..now that Spring Break approaches...it is supposed to rain up here.
Janie

[LindaC]

Dear Janie,

I believe you and I are sisters under the skin in many ways. We both belive passionately that most of the people, most of the time try to do the right thing and in the absolute goodness of God. It's not surprising we share many of the same views. But we do have our differences on some issues and that's what makes this forum interesting!

Weather has been beautiful the last couple of weeks and we played hooky one day and drove out to the dessert to see the beautiful poppies and other wildflowers in bloom. It's turning nasty again this afternoon, thought, with more rain expected next week. We'll probably surpass the rainest season ever in LA. Oh well - the Spring promises to be beautiful and my big birch tree has new leaves!

I hope you get your rain too. I understand the great Northwest is going through quite a drought year. We'll try to send a little your way - LOL! Bet you never thought you'd hear those words!

Love to you Janie,

Linda

[LindaC]

All so true Clara. I agree with Janie that we absolutely need to demand integrity in our business leaders as well as our political leaders. I'm glad the big guys are being held accountable for their lying, cheating ways. About time!

Love,

Linda

[Paula(Ire)]

Hi Linda,

Well, I'd better offer my tuppence worth seeing as you went to the trouble... Hee, hee.

I have never believed sexual relations between two consenting adults should be a firing offence, unless the affair or relationship is shown to have led to either or both party being compromised, or compormising, their status within the job.

In Ireland recently, a minister was brought to book for giving a lucrative PR contract to a woman with whom he was having a relationship, even though extremely competent competitors tendered for the same contract for less money. The only pertinent issue here was that he showed a preference, and that it cost the tax-payer money. The relationship being sexual wasn't relevent. He didn't lose his job, as the trail the inquiry followed couldn't conclusively find that the woman wasn't chosen on merit. She is, as it happens, a very good PR person.

Our own Prime Minister (Taoiseach) until recently had a girlfriend, while still not divorced from his wife - though seperated. She went on state visits with him, the lot. There was not a peep out of the citizens of our very Catholic country. It's the job of our Prime Minister to do a good job of running the country, and to be ethically sound in so-doing when it comes to business. But his private life is his own buisness.

A few years ago, one of our top male ministers was photographed in a park in a compromising position with a young boy. His wife was not amused! He got a slap on the hand (more for getting caught!), and then it was business as usual.

I suppose if your contract stipulates that you do not have affairs within an organization, then it's a firing offence. But for God's sake, the workplace is one of the most likely places to MEET someone and form a relationship.

I think that someone having an affair, or sex, with a co-worker is nothing compared to someone, say, embezzling funds or fixing contracts - white collar crime. All I'd hope is that they use a condom!

Lots of love Linda,
& thanks for the summary,
Paula (Ire).

[LindaC]

Dear Paula,

Thanks for the insight as to the goings on in your neck of the world - this is better than a gossip column!

Seriously, I think the point of major contention here for the Boeing BOD is that Mr. Stonecipher showed poor judgement, period. In other times, they might have looked the other way, but given the circumstances of his employment (he was hired to instill confidence in Boeing after a sordid mess with hiring of relatives of a Pentagon insider and getting preference on lucrative government contracts) any sin of commission was a firing offense.

Given the climate of lying, cheating and stealing in big business today in light of the WorldCom and Enron scandals, to name a few, Boards of Directors are in no mood to put up with any taint of scandal by their CEO's. This is a welcome change, in my opinion.

I hear what you're saying though and actually I met my SO other at work, as I'm sure many others have. As you say, it's one of the prime meeting places for pairing up in today's world. I don't think Mr. Stonecipher would have suffered the same fate had he been one of the grunts in the company as opposed to the CEO. CEO's SHOULD be held to a higher standard.

I think Ms. Carlson's point, and it's a valid one, is that the employees of these companies who had most or all of their life's savings and retirement nest egg tied up in company stock in their 401K's were hurt much more by the crooked numbers crunching of Mr. Lay, et al, than Mr. Stoncipher's affair. Point taken.

That being said, I agree with Janie that a breach of ethics via sexual misconduct is not a horse of another color - it's still a breach of ethics.

Love to you Paula - did I tell you I really look forward to your posts? I always learn something!

Linda

[Debra the Bassplayer]

Dear Linda,
I just have to jump in here and spout off. Though illicit sex is a breach of ethics, it is not even in the same ballpark as the thievery and lying that massively impacts hundreds of employees and shareholders, such as happened an Enron and Worldcom. When I consider the ethics of all of them, through deduction, I come to the conclusion that an illicit sexual affair, unless as Paula pointed out resulted in overt favoritism to the detriment of company employees and shareholders, is a much lesser degree of ethical misconduct than ruining the retirement and lives of those who small nest eggs were demolished by those thieves and liars in high places. Those who lost their life savings would likely agree. It is like comparing apples and oranges.
Just wanted to say that.
love,
Debra

[LindaC]

Dear Debra,

I love it when you spout off! Your point is well taken, and I think that is exactly what Ms. Carlson's editorial was trying to say. That's what I meant by "the hierarchy of ethics being a tad skewed". I think in another time, in another place, Mr. Stonecipher's affair would have never caused his firing. But in today's highly-charged atmosphere, he didn't get away with it.

Apples and oranges are still both in the fruit family, and sexual misconduct is still a breach of ethics. Everything in life is a matter of timing, and Harry's timing stinks.

Love to you Debra

[Brenda (K-W)]

Have been trying to avoid this one but finally, finally, it's got to me. I don't think sexual relations between two consenting adults is a violation of business ethics, or anybody's business for that matter, providing the affair has no bearing on the business, and isn't a violation of conditions of employment. It may well be a violation of personal ethics, that I won't comment on, but it's not a firing offense in my opinion. I do think people get pruriently preoccupied with sex, as if it were the sin to end all sins but an exciting one to read about nevertheless. There are other sins much worse.

The Clinton business was deplorable, and he was a big idiot, but it amuses me that so many wanted details of the goings-on all the time they were decrying it, and then, saying quite sanctimoniously, well, it was really about the lying under oath, but tell me again what he did with the cigar. I doubt Clinton compromised the nation's security by this, the only thing that really counts in a political leader. No doubt the man has a problem, and as much as a cutie as he is, I wouldn't give him house room, but he wasn't a bad president, as history will record.

I think knowingly doing people out of their life savings, cheating, committing fraud, sending children to fight futile wars are all much more sinful than a roll in the hay.

Best, Brenda

[jean214]

What stinks is his or his lover's judgment to write sexually explicit e-mails on company computers to each other. If they had been discreet, he would still be in his job.
best wishes,
jean214

[LindaC]

Ah yes - hoist on the petard of modern technology! It only goes to show stupidity is not the sole provence of the peasants - the big boss can be just as stupid! I love it!

Linda

[LindaC]

Dear Brenda,

In most situations, I would agree with you that sexual relations between consenting adults who work for the same company is not a violation of business ethics. If either of these people is married it is certainly a violation of their marital vows, but that's a private matter, as you say.

Whether Mr. Stonecipher's contract explicitly prohibited him from engaging in sexual affairs with subordinates is not a matter of record, but I think it's a moot point anyway. The BOD simply decided to fire him and that is their right. I think they were afraid this affair, apparently known to at least some people within the company, would become public knowledge and subject them to more government scrutiny. They are in a precarious position due to their own, much larger, indescretions with the aforementioned pentagon insider scandal. Harry's affair would make them look bad, and they didn't want even a scintilla of scandal at this time. As I said to Debra, timing is everything.

As to whether sex in the business world is a bigger sin, or even an equal sin, to lying and cheating investors, employees and stockholders, I think I've reiterated my position several times now. Not only no, but H-ll no! Ken Lay and his ilk have bilked countless employees out of their life savings and retirement nest eggs and deserve everything they get. I hope they throw the book at them!

Bill Clinton showed a remarkable lack of faith in the American people by lying about his sexual escapades in the White House. I'm betting that if he had 'fessed up and begged for forgiveness and declared he had "found God", all would have been forgiven in time. Americans love nothing more than a reformed sinner! No, he was not a bad President, but he was a bad liar.

Ah, I wish I had the youth and libido to indulge in a sinful roll in the hay - or two! But I do have some great memories!

I'm glad you couldn't resist Brenda - I've missed you!

Love,

Linda

[Brenda (K-W)]

Dear Linda: Now, that's a firing offence--stupidity on the part of the CEO.

Love, Brenda

[LindaC]

[Paula(Ire)]

As I love reading your's, Linda!

I'm learning a bit more about the details here. Yes, in terms of showing very poor judgement and being stupidly indiscreet, he deserved to lose his position. Basically, he put his brain in his pants when he was being highly paid to keep it in his skull. He RISKED undermining his position, which shows contempt for those who entrusted him with that position.

I'm no fan of adultry either, yet I believe it's as common as muck. This doesn't make it 'right' (we could get back into 'right & wrong', 'good & evil' here!). I also don't believe the Bible is a fair resourse for rule-making, because it only serves a percentage of citizens. Unless a work contract specifically states adultry as a sacking offence (which would be ludicrous), then it is not a sacking offence. Therefore, if I were sacking Mr. Stonecipher, the word 'adultry' would not appear on his record. What WOULD appear on his record is that he had shown poor judgement for a man in his position. In other words, he got found out!! By this let it be taken that the only sure way not to get 'found out' was not to do it in the first place.

I do NOT condone his adultry. I've been cheated on, and it's not a good feeling. I've also cheated, and guess what? It's not a good feeling. Why doesn't it feel good, even as the one cheating? Because I have risked hurting people I love. That is a very, very low thing to do. Stonecipher did the business world equivilent. He risked hurting people he was paid to protect. It is inconceivable that they could continue to work with him, or to trust him. As with adultry itself, in terms of his wife and family, he betrayed their trust.

Hmmmm. Getting late here!

Love to you,
Paula (Ire).

[LindaC]

Signing off myself now. Going to go home and hunker down in front of a roaring fire with a tall glass of good red wine! Raining again in LA - it's just not right!

Love to you and talk to you Monday Paula!

Linda

[Clara]

Hi Linda,

My feelings about all of this is: If a person has integrity, he has to have it in all areas.
To say it's important to have business integrity, but not personal integrity makes no sense to me. You either have integrity or you don't.
I know honest people in my life who have not committed adultery and have treated their employees extremely well. They are successful people, and they have also done work in the community to help those less fortunate.
If you are a person of true integrity, you express it in all parts of your life. If a person is deceitful in one area, I can't then trust them in any area.

I may be alone in my thinking.

love,Clara