You have just been appointed to the board of directors of TAMU.com, however, the dot.com company has been experiencing some difficult financial times that have resulted in revenue losses in three of the last four quarters. As you take your new position, you discover that two proposals are on the table. Each proposal has been put forth as a means for dealing with TAMU’s immediate financial problems. Proposal #1 recommends all employees be retained, but that an immediate wage freeze for all employees be imposed for the next six months. (Employees may even be asked to take a 5 percent cut in pay if things do not improve by the end of that period.) Proposal #2 recommends that wages not be frozen, but that 5 percent of the company’s workforce be laid off. (One piece of reasoning behind this proposal is that taking more drastic measures will “protect” 95 percent of TAMU’s workers and will send a message to Wall Street and local investors that TAMU is serious about improving its financial position and that it will soon be a stable company once again.) The board is evenly split, seven members for proposal #1 and seven for proposal #2. Yours will be the tie-breaking vote. In your deliberation, describe how an act utilitarian, a rule utilitarian, a rule deontologist, and act deontologist would reach each solution to this dilemma and on what basis. Which solution seems most plausible? Be sure to elaborate and provide your “theoretical” rationale in support of your position. (comprehension)
Sample Solution
