buy custom Ethical Issue essay

buy custom Ethical Issue essay Working with people is not an easy task because every person requires a personal approach and wants to be listened to and understood. It can be very difficult working with many different people in a big organization, where every single employee requires individualistic approach. Inability to build strong communication and good relations with employees forming a team of A players often leads to complications and failures for the company. This proves the necessity to be able to cooperate with every single employee and make them follow ethical norms and rules of the organization. Being a mechanical engineer in the Operation and Maintenance in the Ministry of Defense showed how important it was to have a team which respected and worked well with each other, and was focused on performing a task together. The experience allowed me to solve certain ethical issues and create an ethical conduct for the organization, so it was able to work more effectively and have the same vision. There was a certain ethical issue in Operation and Maintenance sector that contradicted professional ethics; it was discrimination that some workers felt as a result of harsh treatment by their colleagues. A problem was about senior workers being unwilling to help and explain anything to those just entering the working field. I experienced such situations very often when workers with a lot of experience did not want to communicate or help those less experienced. Interns or new workers felt like there was no one they could consult in case they had questions. That was why they felt insecure while performing their tasks which was unacceptable in Operation and Maintenance. Everything connected to engineering had to be done precisely, and there was no place for mistakes. Hence, it was expected from every worker to be a great professional who knew everything about his or her duties. Although the workers entering the field were well prepared and knew almost everything to perform their tasks well, there still were some things they did not know. As a result, they needed extra help. Basically, new workers needed their experienced colleagues to explain them more about milestones of the job, as well as its special nuances in order to do well on the working place. Hence, it was expected from senior workers to be there to support the new employees. Unfortunately, experienced workers did not fulfill this role. They did not help interns or new workers when they asked for their help. Even more, they tried to communicate with new workers as little as possible, avoiding them and not talking unless necessary. Whenever young employees asked them for something, seniors would say that they had many tasks to do and not help. The same happened many times, so young employees were left to themselves to figure out many challenges. As a result, they did not feel any support or interest toward their work from other people, which left them frustrated and unhappy with their jobs. They also di d not learn the way they had to. As a mechanical engineer, I saw many people come and leave the Ministry of Defense simply because of their relationship with coworkers. They could not communicate with them properly as well as exchange ideas, and they felt that the job was too depersonalized and they could no longer do it. As a result, this sector of Ministry of Defense had a constant flow of employees coming and leaving without staying for a long period of time. Only veterans remained for a long time, but there was a negative side to it since only few new people entered a working field, and there was no fresh blood or bright ideas coming into work. Basically, discrimination of younger workers made them feel uncomfortable with their jobs. Those who did stay did not feel like they belonged with the rest of the workers, so they did not communicate with experienced colleagues. Basically, the whole team of workers was split into two parts, one consisting of experienced colleagues unwilling to talk to younger group. It was a very bad situation for the entire organization, and it was also against professional ethics with one group discriminating the other. As a result, the organization could not work well with Operation and Maintenance sector not performing their tasks properly. This division had a lasting influence on the entire team. With the division into two groups, people simply stopped communicating; they were focused on their tasks only. Although perfectionism many employees expressed was beneficial for the organization, the lack of teamwork brought many disadvantages for the sector. The first disadvantage which was mentioned before was the fact that it was more difficult for the new employees to learn. They did not know everything needed about the job in the very beginning, and it had a negative impact on their performance; as a result, it had a negative impact on the entire sector. Another negative consequence was the attitude many people developed toward their jobs. Younger workers felt like there was little that depended on them, so they did not care much about their performance. They felt like their job did not matter, since all of the important tasks were performed by the senior workers. As a result, new employees and interns did not try to lear n a lot by themselves or surprise everyone with their knowledge and devotion to the job. Although there were some people truly eager to learn, their enthusiasm did not last for long. After being surrounded by passive coworkers for some time and with no chance of talking to other employees, enthusiastic workers lost their eagerness and became passive as well as the rest. Experienced workers, on the other hand, were more passionate about the job, viewing it as the most important thing they had to do. Nevertheless, despite their perfectionist attitude to the things they were doing, they were often very arrogant and competitive with each other to the point that they did not help their fellow workers even when it was essential. Buy custom Ethical Issue essay

Definition and Examples of Pejorative Language

Definition and Examples of Pejorative Language The term pejorative language refers to words and phrases that hurt, insult, or disparage someone or something. Also called a  derogatory term or a term of abuse. The label pejorative (or derogatory) is sometimes used in dictionaries and glossaries to identify expressions that offend or belittle a subject. Nonetheless, a word thats regarded as pejorative in one context may have a non-pejorative function or effect in a different context. Examples and Observations of Pejorative Language It is often ... the case that pejorative terms are stronger when applied to women: bitch is seldom a compliment, whereas bastard (especially old bastard) can under some circumstances be intended as a term of respect or affection. Of similar positive status when masculine is dog (as in you old dog!, admiring a rouà ©); when feminine in reference in AmE it means an ugly woman. Witch is almost always pejorative, whereas wizard is often a compliment.(Tom McArthur, Concise Oxford Companion to the English Language. Oxford University Press, 2005)[T]here is a tendency to select our pejorative epithets with a view not to their accuracy but to their power of hurting...The best protection against this is to remind ourselves again and again what the proper function of pejorative words is. The ultimate, simplest and most abstract, is bad itself. The only good purpose for ever departing from that monosyllable when we condemn anything is to be more specific, to answer the question Bad in what way? Pejorative words are rightly used only when they do this. Swine, as a term of abuse, is now a bad pejorative word, because it brings no one accusation rather than another against the person it vilifies; coward and liar are good ones because they charge a man with a particular faultof which he might be proved guilty or innocent.  (C. S. Lewis, Studies in Words. Cambridge University Press, 1960) Pejorative Language As a  Persuasive  Strategy One important feature of a narratio  is that of characterization of the major players. The use of pejorative language was in order to dispose the audience in a particular direction toward ones own viewpoint and against that of others. Hence we hear [in the epistles of St. Paul] about false brothers secretly brought in who spy things out, or about those reputed to be pillars, or about Peters and Barnabas hypocrisy. This use of pejorative and emotional language is not accidental. It is meant to raise animus against the opposing viewpoint and sympathy for the speakers case.  (Ben Witherington, III, Grace in Galatia: A Commentary on Pauls Letter to the Galatians. TT Clark Ltd., 1998) Euphemisms and Lexical Change There are cases of euphemisms leading to lexical change in the past. For instance, imbecile originally meant weak and idiot meant non-expert, layperson. When these words had their meanings extended to soften the blow of saying that someone had very limited intellectual powers, the original meanings were obscured and eventually got lost. Unfortunately, when we use euphemisms, the unpleasant associations eventually catch up with the new word. Then it is time to find another one. (Surely, a more effective solution to the problem of reducing the hurt caused by using pejorative language is to change the attitudes of people who consciously or unconsciously use such language. Not an easy task.)(Francis Katamba, English Words: Structure, History, Usage, 2nd ed. Routledge, 2005) Rhetoric As a Pejorative Term The art of rhetoric was held in high regard from ancient Greece until late in the 19th century, occupying a prominent position in the paideia, which signified both education and culture. . . .Towards the end of the 19th century, rhetoric fell into disrepute and was no longer taught in the various educational institutions. The word rhetoric received a pejorative meaning, suggesting the use of underhanded tricks, fraud, and deceit, or the stringing together of hollow words, hackneyed expressions and mere platitudes. To be rhetorical was to be bombastic.(Samuel Ijsseling, Rhetoric and Philosophy in Conflict: An Historical Survey, 1975. Trans. from the Dutch by Paul Dunphy. Martinus Nijhoff, 1976)Rhetoric is not a term to embrace lightly; it is too pockmarked by a century in which it has been deemed to be associated merely with sophistication (in the less positive sense of that word), cant and emptiness. It has seemed to suggest a state in which language floats free of its context and th us becomes deracinated, superfluousperhaps inflatedand ultimately meaningless. This palsied view of rhetoric is not new, however. The earliest recorded pejorative reference to rhetoric in English, according to the OED, dates from the mid-sixteenth century. Plato was fiercely critical of it. It seems that the epithetic phrase sweet rhetoric has been particularly far from peoples mouths in the last hundred years or so.(Richard Andrews, Introduction. Rebirth of Rhetoric: Essays in Language, Culture and Education. Routledge, 1992)