• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

What Would You Do?

SalixIncendium

अग्निविलोवनन्दः
Staff member
Premium Member
I've all but made my choice already, but I'm interested in hearing how others would handle this situation from a moral/ethical perspective.

I run a logistics company and had recently made a decision that it was time to move on from that position and apply for my dream job (some of you might know what this is, because I mentioned it recently in another thread). I applied a few days ago, was offered the position yesterday, and I accepted it.

So here I am a day later waiting for my background check to clear and to be scheduled for orientation, and I planned on giving notice as soon as this happened. This afternoon, the owner tells me that the partner we serve issued a breach of contract for reliability...caused, of course, by them (long story I can answer later if anyone is interested)...and he has been given 90 days to cure the breach or they will terminate the contract.

So here I am presented with this news, a day or two away from submitting my resignation letter, knowing full well that if I step away and move on to my dream job, the company won't cure the breach and thereby won't survive, not only putting the owner out of business, but displacing 50 or so employees as well.

So there is a clear choice. Stay with the company at least until they cure the breach, or move on with the dream job and let the chips fall where they may with the logistics company.

As I said above, I've all but made the choice, but I want to hear what you would do given the same situation.
 

Debater Slayer

Vipassana
Staff member
Premium Member
It would depend on how the current company treated me, how likely I was to land my dream job later, and how much of a difference the dream job could make to me in the first place—assuming I could trust the owner to be telling the truth.

If I found myself doing well and not in dire need of leaving, I would most likely stay. But I have a habit of giving strong consideration to others' needs even when they conflict with my own, so I might not be the best judge of this. I just think that 50 people being out of work at a time like this could well seal the deal for me and make me stay.
 

Brickjectivity

Turned to Stone. Now I stretch daily.
Staff member
Premium Member
I would not trust what the owner told me and would assume it was a ruse to keep me from quitting, but that is just me. An employer can (likely) set it up to be notified if a background check is being run on an employee. We have to sign all kinds of nonsense releases to get hired, and most of the agencies that do the hiring are in some way connected. Therefore I'd think the owner knew I was about to leave. I wouldn't trust the owner in this matter.

But lets say that I knew for a fact that the other company was suing for breach of trust. That might be different. That would be a confusing decision. I would likely side with the owner.
 

SalixIncendium

अग्निविलोवनन्दः
Staff member
Premium Member
I would not trust what the owner told me and would assume it was a ruse to keep me from quitting, but that is just me.

I probably should have mentioned this, but the owner has no idea I was considering leaving.

Also, he forwarded me the BoC notice.
 

The Sum of Awe

Brought to you by the moment that spacetime began.
Like @Debater Slayer said, it depends on how the company has treated me. If I felt like the company has been good to me, enough to where I would consider staying, I would likely stay. I would especially tell the dream job employer the complication, and tell him that I hope to reapply as soon as the contract is saved for the current company. I feel like they could admire the loyalty to your employing company and consider you in the future.
 

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
My background would enter in. I was hired for a job once and when I showed up to start, I found that I had been moved to another job with another boss. In another case I had a great programming gig and when I came back from a vacation found I was now doing tech support.

So I'd first question whether the dream job would really be there and last - unknowable of course but I became skeptical about what sounded good or was good at the start.

And I had rotating bosses at one job with none lasting more than a year.

Next I'd wonder what kind of people you work for now. Are you treated right?

I'd next factor in how fast the new job wanted you to start - whether or not you had flexibility to at least help out somewhat with your current gig.

But in the end and just based on the OP I'd stay rather than screw 50 people out of a job.
 

beenherebeforeagain

Rogue Animist
Premium Member
Would--or even could--your continued presence and work production really make a difference for your current employer? So if you stay, what are the chances the contract and the company fail?

It may or may not be relevant, but if there really is a problem in the current employer, as evidenced by the lawsuit, it is unlikely that THAT is the only problem the company faces...

Anyway, your decision to apply and accept the new job were already made...is the 'new' situation really changing anything fundamental for you? If it had not happened until the day after you announced your move, would that have made any difference?
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
I've all but made my choice already, but I'm interested in hearing how others would handle this situation from a moral/ethical perspective.

I run a logistics company and had recently made a decision that it was time to move on from that position and apply for my dream job (some of you might know what this is, because I mentioned it recently in another thread). I applied a few days ago, was offered the position yesterday, and I accepted it.

So here I am a day later waiting for my background check to clear and to be scheduled for orientation, and I planned on giving notice as soon as this happened. This afternoon, the owner tells me that the partner we serve issued a breach of contract for reliability...caused, of course, by them (long story I can answer later if anyone is interested)...and he has been given 90 days to cure the breach or they will terminate the contract.

So here I am presented with this news, a day or two away from submitting my resignation letter, knowing full well that if I step away and move on to my dream job, the company won't cure the breach and thereby won't survive, not only putting the owner out of business, but displacing 50 or so employees as well.

So there is a clear choice. Stay with the company at least until they cure the breach, or move on with the dream job and let the chips fall where they may with the logistics company.

As I said above, I've all but made the choice, but I want to hear what you would do given the same situation.
I'm not sure you've explained why you can't move to your new job, and still give whatever evidence is required to your current employer. These don't seem to be mutually exclusive.
 

SalixIncendium

अग्निविलोवनन्दः
Staff member
Premium Member
I'm not sure you've explained why you can't move to your new job, and still give whatever evidence is required to your current employer. These don't seem to be mutually exclusive.

Either you're not understanding the exercise or I'm not understanding what you're saying.

I never said I can't move to my new job. What evidence is required? What evidence would I need to furnish to either party? What isn't mutually exclusive?
 

lewisnotmiller

Grand Hat
Staff member
Premium Member
Explain the situation to the new employer,
& see if something beneficial to all can
be negotiated. This isn't a choice...just
a preliminary step to making one.

This was my first thought too.
We often grant extended notice period to people we are hiring (as in, we hold the job while they work out an extended notice period), since they are often working on projects, and we see it as a positive to hire people who have a 'finish the job' mentality.

Within reason...

If there is no wiggle room at all, I'm moving to the new job.
 

Shaul

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Unless you yourself caused the problem you have no moral obligation to stay. As unfortunate for your employer the timing may be, you are not responsible. You do have a moral obligation to give your current employer as much notice as you can without compromising your own interests. Which, as I read, you are already planning to do. Your employer will survive even if you leave, I think. Whether he does or not, that is not your obligation if you leave.
 

SalixIncendium

अग्निविलोवनन्दः
Staff member
Premium Member
Explain the situation to the new employer,
& see if something beneficial to all can
be negotiated. This isn't a choice...just
a preliminary step to making one.
This was my first thought too.
We often grant extended notice period to people we are hiring (as in, we hold the job while they work out an extended notice period), since they are often working on projects, and we see it as a positive to hire people who have a 'finish the job' mentality.

Within reason...

If there is no wiggle room at all, I'm moving to the new job.

The concern is big business...major corporations...like the company that offered the position...don't tend to see or consider such options. If I'm not available at the time they need me, they tend to move on to the next candidate.
 

lewisnotmiller

Grand Hat
Staff member
Premium Member
The concern is big business...major corporations...like the company that offered the position...don't tend to see or consider such options. If I'm not available at the time they need me, they tend to move on to the next candidate.

Depends.
Don't get me wrong, totally happy that your circumstances are as you present, not second guessing that at all.

I work for a pretty big, listed tech consultancy. Our industry is pretty cut-throat, and we compete against such 'gentle' souls as Deloittes, KPMG, etc. Overall, the rep of our industry is pretty mercenary I would say.
The reason we allow people some flexibility in coming across is pure pragmatism, to be honest. The people we want to employ are often difficult to get, and being 'relatively' accommodating when we are competing against other consultancies for skilled staff is a way to differentiate and get the person we are after. For much the same reason we are much more accommodating with work flexibiity and location. It's not that we're nice guys (although I still claim I am). It's for competitive reasons.
So from my perspective the relative scarcity of people able to do the job they are hiring you for might be more impactful on flexibility then the size of the company.

Again, not saying you're wrong about your circumstance, at all. That would be ridiculous. Just outlining what I've seen locally.
 

lewisnotmiller

Grand Hat
Staff member
Premium Member
Unless you yourself caused the problem you have no moral obligation to stay. As unfortunate for your employer the timing may be, you are not responsible. You do have a moral obligation to give your current employer as much notice as you can without compromising your own interests. Which, as I read, you are already planning to do. Your employer will survive even if you leave, I think. Whether he does or not, that is not your obligation if you leave.

Yep, I agree with this. Do what you can, but end of the day it's a company issue, and you will no longer work for the company.
 

Debater Slayer

Vipassana
Staff member
Premium Member
Unless you yourself caused the problem you have no moral obligation to stay. As unfortunate for your employer the timing may be, you are not responsible. You do have a moral obligation to give your current employer as much notice as you can without compromising your own interests. Which, as I read, you are already planning to do. Your employer will survive even if you leave, I think. Whether he does or not, that is not your obligation if you leave.

Yep, I agree with this. Do what you can, but end of the day it's a company issue, and you will no longer work for the company.

But the end result is the same for the 50 employees regardless of who is responsible. If moving on to the next job leaves all of them jobless, doesn't that outweigh the benefit from going to the next job?

One person stays and loses out on a job he wants more than this one, but he still does well and can apply later. He leaves and 50 people lose their livelihood. I think the former scenario is the better choice, personally (although I wouldn't judge anyone for choosing otherwise).
 

Shaul

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
But the end result is the same for the 50 employees regardless of who is responsible. If moving on to the next job leaves all of them jobless, doesn't that outweigh the benefit from going to the next job?

One person stays and loses out on a job he wants more than this one, but he still does well and can apply later. He leaves and 50 people lose their livelihood. I think the former scenario is the better choice, personally (although I wouldn't judge anyone for choosing otherwise).
I reject the hypothetical "if". An employee leaving is not causal for the company collapse. The onus for the company failure ultimately lies with the management and/or owners. Management actions are the cause. Even if a particular employee departing precipitates the failure, it was still management that should have foreseen and made contingencies for such a possibility.

Employment is "at will" (in most cases). Employees are responsible for their own careers. Maintaining a unidirectional between employees and employers loyalty is itself immoral, and misguided. Employees do not need to justify changing positions to any employer.
 

Debater Slayer

Vipassana
Staff member
Premium Member
I reject the hypothetical "if". An employee leaving is not causal for the company collapse. The onus for the company failure ultimately lies with the management and/or owners. Management actions are the cause. Even if a particular employee departing precipitates the failure, it was still management that should have foreseen and made contingencies for such a possibility.

Employment is "at will" (in most cases). Employees are responsible for their own careers. Maintaining a unidirectional between employees and employers loyalty is itself immoral, and misguided. Employees do not need to justify changing positions to any employer.

The "if" matches the scenario given in the OP as I understand it: when you leave, the company won't be able to resolve the breach of contract and will face eventual collapse.

Also, I don't see this as a matter of justifying anything to the employer; it's a personal decision that the employee makes per their own conscience. The employer isn't entitled to any justification, but such entitlement isn't what the scenario entails.
 

Viker

Häxan
What would I do? What ever I will want. If I have an opportunity and it's a better option, I will go for it. I would not completely burn any bridge behind me if it came from a fine place. I would inform both current and future employer as appropriate and I would move to the next step.
 
Top