Question

3. Consider the following ethical dilemma that was discussed earlier in this chapter:
Under the reduction in force (RIF) format, the supervisor, me, gets told on
2. Discussion Question 1
• Due Date: Day 2 [Main] forum
• Post your response to this question: Answer Question 3 on p. 150 (Ch. 6) in Ethical
Leadership in Human Services regarding the ethical dilemma of a reduction in force
(RIF).








Thursday what supervisees have to come in on Friday to get chopped, and they are
to be gone that day. . . . I personally believe that that’s unethical . . . not because it’ssevere, but because it’s not balanced . . . We would not tolerate any employee doing
that to us.

Answer 1

http://www.jiskha.com/display.cgi?id=1231864278

Answer 2

Is this what you're writing?

<i>. . . . I personally believe that that’s unethical . . . not because it’ssevere, but because it’s not balanced . . . We would not tolerate any employee doing that to us.</i>

I don't know how you're being graded on this or how long or how detailed your response needs to be. Here are the issues I see in what you have so far:

* Why all the ellipses? When a sentence ends, there needs to be a period. The next sentence needs to begin with a capital letter.

* "I personally" is redundant. Would you be writing impersonally?? =)

* "that that's" = exactly what is that second "that" referring to? Be specific.

* What do you mean by "it" and "severe"? (And don't forget the space between "it's" and "severe" if you decide to keep this phrasing.)

* What do you mean by "not balanced"? What would "balanced" be?

* Who are "we" and "us"?

* What is "that" (again)?

If I were grading, I would give this response a zero because it's filled with vague generalities and no specifics or logic.