Legislating Ethics....

[mwb]

I am of the opinion it is impossible to pass laws that force people to be ethical. I'm thinking of laws like Sarbanes-Oxley. One scandal is replaced by another. Now we have the options dating scandals. It will never end.

Plus if an ethical person works in a company & his boss is not ethical, the ethical person will usually defer to the boss since his job is usually more important than his principles.

I worked for a CPA. I worked for him for 3 years full-time. I should have been treated like an employee but it was to his benefit to treat me like a consultant do he didn't have to pay me the same benefits all other full time people were receiving. Then I was laid off so they could bring in two people for more money with benefits.

So much for ethics.

 

[quatona]

I am of the opinion it is impossible to pass laws that force people to be ethical. I'm thinking of laws like Sarbanes-Oxley. One scandal is replaced by another. Now we have the options dating scandals. It will never end.

Plus if an ethical person works in a company & his boss is not ethical, the ethical person will usually defer to the boss since his job is usually more important than his principles.

I worked for a CPA. I worked for him for 3 years full-time. I should have been treated like an employee but it was to his benefit to treat me like a consultant do he didn't have to pay me the same benefits all other full time people were receiving. Then I was laid off so they could bring in two people for more money with benefits.

So much for ethics.

I don´t know what laws are other than the attempt to legislate ethics.
Granted, laws can´t force people to behave the way you want them to behave, but they are the attempt to deter people who behave in a way that is considered unethical by threatening them with punishment.

 

[Multi-Elis]

On the one hand, legislating ethics has an effect on people:
Most people in france were for the death penalty, untill Mitterand dared to do something that could have turned against him -- abolished the death penalty in 1981. This seems to have influenced mentalities, well at least since 25 years ago, most people in France are against the death penalty.

Yet legislation is easy to get around when you really want to: A friend of mine had a visa that allowed her to work part time. The job she had was one that could only be done full time. Because my friend was so desprate for money, and because she enjoyed the job and felt she was doing it for a good cause, my friend worked full time, being declared as part time. They could have gotten her a co-worker to share the load. But they didn't. The worst is this: This firend of mine's salary was being payed by the Europeen Union. It was declared by her employers to be 4 times what she was actually being payed. (2400E a month declared, 600E a month recieved. 1800 difference) Her boss was pocketing the rest. Her boss could have paid her at least twice as much, if she wanted to pocket money. That way it's morally more legal: My friend works declared as part time earning double the minimum wage, but in fact works full time earning minimum wage. But no: she ended up working full time for half of minimum wage! (3E an hour)
This boss found all the schemes she needed to 'legally' fire people. She spent her money that she pocketed by paying quacks to renovate her office so that there would be the right "energy flow". She went bankrupt, had to close her company, she lost all her friends. So I sometimes wonder if there is a moral legal system that takes care of itself. And perhaps the best way to have good luck, the best way to make the right energy flows, is to morally treat people correctly.

 

[mwb]

I don´t know what laws are other than the attempt to legislate ethics.
Granted, laws can´t force people to behave the way you want them to behave, but they are the attempt to deter people who behave in a way that is considered unethical by threatening them with punishment.

I suppose I'm referring to laws that are supposed to make people honest not necessarily those that prevent crime.

It seems there will always be dishonest people that will never be stopped. But the laws are so stringent that honest people are prevented from entering a profession.

For example, if a state decided all financial advisors had to be licensed with the state, this would not stop dishonest people. Dishonest people are not dumb. They can get the education, pass state licensing exams & still be dishonest. Yet an honest person may be unable to get the education & pass the state licensing exams because he doesn't have the time or money to meet the requirements.

 

[Multi-Elis]

http://www.jims.net/jims_books.htm
http://www.jims.net/What_will_they_franchise_next.pdf
This is someone who thinks that it is in one's own interest, buisness interest, to have honesty and ethics.
So -- no. I don't think you can legislate honesty in all people, you have to convince them that in the end it's more profitable (for whatever reason) to be honest.
Law can only make certain people aware of what is honest and isn't honest, which in tern filters into the mentality.

 

[quatona]

I suppose I'm referring to laws that are supposed to make people honest not necessarily those that prevent crime.

caveat1: I may still not entirely get your point.
caveat2: I am very skeptical towards the entire idea of punishment, so I might not exactly be the right person to explain the intentions of legislation.
But anyways:
For to "make people honest"(as in character/mindset, as I understand your distinction) I don´t see any other possible method than brainwashing them.
Everything else are just attempts to promote the idea of honesty, and not reliably successful ones.
If I understand the idea of laws and punishment correctly, it is a form of conditioning: Behave, or else you will be punished! It concentrates on behaviour, not on character or mindset. Then again, the mere fact that certain ways of behaving are prohibited communicates the idea that the underlying intentions are considered immoral.
It is possible that - in the long term - this moral view will become sort of natural to the people. In the beginning, people don´t do things merel

It seems there will always be dishonest people that will never be stopped. But the laws are so stringent that honest people are prevented from entering a profession.

For example, if a state decided all financial advisors had to be licensed with the state, this would not stop dishonest people. Dishonest people are not dumb. They can get the education, pass state licensing exams & still be dishonest. Yet an honest person may be unable to get the education & pass the state licensing exams because he doesn't have the time or money to meet the requirements.

Just so I get you right: Are you complaining about laws being inherently unable to shape the characters of persons, or are you complaining about particular unjust parts of a given law that you think need to be fixed?

 

[kopilo]

Laws can only be as effective as they are enforced.

 

[KarateCowboy]

I am of the opinion it is impossible to pass laws that force people to be ethical. I'm thinking of laws like Sarbanes-Oxley. One scandal is replaced by another. Now we have the options dating scandals. It will never end.

Plus if an ethical person works in a company & his boss is not ethical, the ethical person will usually defer to the boss since his job is usually more important than his principles.

I worked for a CPA. I worked for him for 3 years full-time. I should have been treated like an employee but it was to his benefit to treat me like a consultant do he didn't have to pay me the same benefits all other full time people were receiving. Then I was laid off so they could bring in two people for more money with benefits.

So much for ethics.

That's a pretty depressing outlook.

 

[wanderingone]

I think the primary premise of laws that encourage "ethical" behavior is to minimize the damage to those who are/or would be harmed by the lack of ethics, and give people a way to be heard and compensated when ethics don't prevail (while attempting to put the cost of it on the person/company/institution that violated the law)

No law will force people to be ethical, honest, humane, not rob the local convenience store etc.. but some people will be deterred by the fear of what happens if they violate the law.

 

[wanderingone]

I am of the opinion it is impossible to pass laws that force people to be ethical. I'm thinking of laws like Sarbanes-Oxley. One scandal is replaced by another. Now we have the options dating scandals. It will never end.

Plus if an ethical person works in a company & his boss is not ethical, the ethical person will usually defer to the boss since his job is usually more important than his principles.

I worked for a CPA. I worked for him for 3 years full-time. I should have been treated like an employee but it was to his benefit to treat me like a consultant do he didn't have to pay me the same benefits all other full time people were receiving. Then I was laid off so they could bring in two people for more money with benefits.

So much for ethics.

I'm not sure if your specific situation is an example of any violation of a legally controlled ethic. It's pretty standard for businesses to use consultants, and most consultants (in my experience) work for contracted periods of time and aren't promised permanency. Perhaps if the employer promised that when a slot opened up in their work force they would hire you, then they lacked individual ethics. My office hires consultants as a means to avoid the civil service list, I find that somewhat unethical, and in violation of civil service law. But when a complaint gets filed and the consultants get dumped so someone can get a title I don't know if dumping the consultant is a lack of ethics on the part of the employer, or compliance WITH an ethical standard.

 

[mwb]

In a way I agree with you which is why I didn't take legal action. What they did was not illegal but I feel it was unethical. Keep in mind, I worked for this company for 10 years before leaving & they called me back. They were unethical when they decided to make my job full time & they offered it to someone else for more money & with benefits. They should have shown me the same respect.

 

[mwb]

Just so I get you right: Are you complaining about laws being inherently unable to shape the characters of persons, or are you complaining about particular unjust parts of a given law that you think need to be fixed?

I'm saying it is impossible to legislate or mandate ethics. It's difficult to define so there are loopholes which people can use to justify their actions & say they are not unethical. I read articles about ethics in accounting magazines & laugh at them. There is no incentive to be ethical if there is no enforcement of ethics.

In addition, I feel making it more difficult to enter a profession by raising the educational requirements does not weed out unethical people.

 

[quatona]

I'm saying it is impossible to legislate or mandate ethics.

There seems to be not much disagreement about that being impossible in a perfect way.
Another question would be: Is that the purpose of legislation, in the first place?

It's difficult to define so there are loopholes which people can use to justify their actions & say they are not unethical. I read articles about ethics in accounting magazines & laugh at them. There is no incentive to be ethical if there is no enforcement of ethics.

I think there are many incentives to be ethical. Threats with punishment being one of the less effective, anyways.

In addition, I feel making it more difficult to enter a profession by raising the educational requirements does not weed out unethical people.

I´m sorry, I don´t understand the grammatical structure of this sentence and therefore I don´t understand its meaning. Can you reword it for me, please?