Business Ethics

Q1.A
Ans: WHEN WE talk about this economic crisis, let's look at why regulation
failed, and will continue to fail in the future to prevent a meltdown. Let's talk
about greed. Let's talk about sneering at the idea that the common good or
ethics could have any part to play in the "real world" of high finance. Let's
talk about exploiting the vulnerable, and reckless, insane gambling. Let's talk
about the way that capitalism has decided that moral behavior is for little
people, and how little people get crushed.
There is a deep and justified anger among ordinary people that the arrogant
and irresponsible actions of people obsessed with profit will, in all likelihood,
tip us into the mother and father of all recessions. This crisis is not just the
result of a temporary blip, but an inevitable result of one flawed assumption:
that the most important function of business is to maximize profits for
shareholders. You can have all the regulation you like, but it won't work so
long as people within the system are doing their damndest to get around it.
Adam Smith, the great proponent of the free market, would be unable to
recognize the travesty that exists today. Certainly, he believed that humans
acted from self-interest. However, he also believed that compassion,
friendship, love, and the desire for social approval were at least as important
as self-interest as motives.
Smith could afford to take for granted that without ethical and responsible
behavior, the market could not operate. We have witnessed for over two
decades behavior that has destroyed trust in financial institutions. The
system is broken, and it cannot be fixed until people learn that ethics is not
just for wimps, but an integral and necessary part of business.
The maximizing of profit for shareholders is an individualistic and
unsustainable model. Because it ignores justice and fairness, it contains
within it the seeds of its own destruction. Difficult (impossible?) as it is to
imagine people in financial institutions returning to some form of moral
behavior, even that would not be enough.
The stakeholder model is often proposed as a remedy for the flaws of the
shareholder model. While the shareholder model proposes that maximizing
profit for the shareholder is the ultimate good, the stakeholder model states
that it is just one aim among many. The stakeholder model suggests
corporations should be managed for the benefit of all its stakeholders
(customers, suppliers, owners, employees, communities). This represents an
advance, but it is not enough. We need to recover a concept of the common
good. Both the shareholder and stakeholder model are founded on the idea
that human beings are primarily individuals working in their own best
interests. The stakeholder model does not sufficiently recognize that human

beings are united by considerations greater than just reciprocal interest.

There is a greater good, a vision of society where human beings can flourish.
One of the ways in which business and finance have gone off the rails is in
viewing employees as contributing to the bottom line, and not as human
beings with rights and responsibilities. It is an unsustainable model because
it treats human beings like cannon fodder, to be used and discarded.
Annihilating goodwill only leads to cynicism and disengagement. When
employees have no sense of loyalty to a firm because it has no sense of
loyalty to them, the firm is engaged in merrily sawing off the branch it is
sitting on.
Some might say that all this talk of treating human beings as if they
mattered is fine and dandy, but banks in particular will not change any of
their practices while the Government underwrites them. The Government
was faced with a very difficult situation. As a small, open economy with a
small number of financial institutions, the collapse of any one would have
had serious repercussions.
However, unless the model of business and finance changes drastically,
crises will continue to occur, and not just once a century, as the ever
optimistic Alan Greenspan believes. Cycles are inevitable in the business
world, but there are two factors at work here that did not pertain to the same
degree before. One is a cynical amorality, and the other is technology.
Technology amplified the crisis in at least two ways. The vast base of global
information technology has linked markets, and allowed financial
organizations to create and execute trades cheaply and quickly. However,
the speed just brought the house of cards tumbling down faster. Secondly,
the pervasive nature of technology means that there is no space for
reflection. People are always caught up in a frantic pace that allows little
time for family, and still less to contemplate the values underlying all the
activity.
Once, "professional" meant virtues like prudence, judgment, reliability, and
long-term thinking. Until we can begin to recover virtues like these, we will
have no faith in a shower of chancres who will gamble and risk worldwide
recession just because it will make some of them very rich indeed. Until that
faith is recovered, the system will continue to be rotten.

Q1.B
An: Ethics of care has been criticized by both feminists and those who favor
more traditional, and arguably masculine, approaches to ethics. In brief,
feminists object that the one caring is, in effect, carrying out the traditional

female role in life of giving while receiving little in return. Those who accept
more traditional approaches to ethics argue that the partiality shown to
those closest to us in Nodding' theory is inappropriate.
Nodding tends to use unequal relationships as a model for understanding
caring. Philosopher and lesbian-feminist Sarah Lucia Hoagland argues that
the relationships in question, such as parenting and teaching, are ideally
relationships where caring is a transitory thing designed to foster the
independence of the cared-for, and so end the unequal caring relationship.
Unequal relationships, she writes, are ethically problematic, and so a poor
model for an ethical theory. Hoagland argues that on Noddings' account of
ethical caring, the one-caring is placed in the role of the giver and the caredfor in the role of the taker. The one-caring is dominant, choosing what is
good for the cared-for, but gives without receiving caring in return. The
cared-for is put in the position of being a dependent, with insufficient control
over the nature of the caring. Hoagland believes that such unequal
relationships cannot be morally good

Q2.A
Ans:
THIS GENERALIZATION OF THE STATEMENT IS NOT RIGHT.
CONS OF THIS STATEMENT.
BIG BUSINESS BRINGS A LOT OF BENEFITS TO THE COMMUNITY.
Benefits Include:
-Maximize Sales and Profit:
*brings return on investment for the stakeholders.
*brings job opportunity for the community.
*brings better living for the job holders.
*brings more products for better lifestyle.etc
-Growth Path:
*career opportunities for many aspirants from the community.
-Collaboration and Productivity Enhancement:
*Big Business helps the employees work together and share lifestyle
information.

-Easy to Use:
*Big Business helps the employees to learn/ develop themselves
with easy to use knowledge/skill.
-Value:
*Big Business helps to add value to your life by providing
resources support like superannuation.
-Advanced Technology:
*The latest technologies are integrated into Big Business to automate the
entire business process and infrastructure and make you more productive.
This enriches your life and your own knowledge.
Etc
CONS OF THIS STATEMENT
-sometimes big business focus too much on finance
and less on human resources.
-sometimes big business try to go for bigger profit
at the cost of the consumer--some kind of exploitation.
-sometimes pay very little attention to the local
community needs.
-sometimes exploits the workers.etc.

Q2.B
Ans: All government officers of the United States, including the President,
the Justices of the Supreme Court, and all members of Congress, pledge first
and foremost to uphold the Constitution. These oaths affirm that the rule of
law is superior to the rule of any human leader. At the same time, the federal
government does have considerable discretion: the legislative branch is free
to decide what statutes it will write, as long as it stays within its enumerated
powers and respects the constitutionally protected rights of individuals.
Likewise, the judicial branch has a degree of judicial discretion, and the

executive branch also has various discretionary powers

including prosecutorial discretion.
Scholars continue to debate whether the U.S. Constitution adopted a
particular interpretation of the "rule of law," and if so, which one. For
example, Law Professor John Harrison asserts that the word "law" in the
Constitution is simply defined as that which is legally binding, rather than
being "defined by formal or substantive criteria," and therefore judges do not
have discretion to decide that laws fail to satisfy such unwritten and vague
criteria. Law Professor Frederick Mark Gedicks disagrees, writing
that Cicero, Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, and the framers of the U.S.
Constitution believed that an unjust law was not really a law at all.
James Wilson said during the Philadelphia Convention in 1787 that, "Laws
may be unjust, may be unwise, may be dangerous, may be destructive; and
yet not be so unconstitutional as to justify the Judges in refusing to give
them effect." George Mason agreed that judges "could declare an
unconstitutional law void. But with regard to every law, however unjust,
oppressive or pernicious, which did not come plainly under this description,
they would be under the necessity as judges to give it a free course.

Q3.A
Ans: Intra - generational equity refers to the fairness in the utilization of
resources among human members of the present generation, both
domestically and globally. It is contended that intra-generational equity as
manifest in distributive justice has become the de facto legal principle for
developing countries and in general by the industrialized countries.
The principle of intra-generation equity demands that the benefits of
environmental conservation and protection should be shared in an equitable
manner. Therefore, any strategy for conservation of environment in the
interest of the nation cannot be justified by excluding the interests of those
dependent on the natural environment for their survival. Thus the larger
'public interest' of environmental conservation should not suppress the local
interest. The application of this principle would imply that the livelihood
requirements of communities living in and around the conservation areas
must be fully taken care of by recognition of local rights through legal and
institutional means.

Inter generational equity

Intergenerational equity calls for the fairness in the utilization of resources
between human generations: past, present and future. This requires that a
balance be attained between meeting the consumptive demands of existing
societies and ensuring the adequate resources are available for the future
generations.
Among the scholars who have considered environmental rights and
obligations two who have enunciated valuable guiding principles are Edith
Brown Weiss and Joshep Sax. Weiss has recommended three basic principles
of intergenerational equity
First: each generation should be required to conserve the diversity of the
natural and cultural resource base, so that it does not unduly restrict the
options available to the future generations in solving their problems and
satisfying their own values and should be entitled to diversity comparable to
that of the previous generations.
Second: each generation should be required to maintain the quality of
planet so that it is passed on in no worse condition than the present
generation received it, and should be entitled to a quality of planet
comparable to the one enjoyed by previous generations.
Third: each generation should provide its members with equitable rights of
access to the legacy from the past generations and should conserve this
access for future generations.
An innovative domestic court decision on inter generational equity is a 1993
Philippine Supreme Court case: Minors Oppose V. Secretary of the
department of environment and Natural resources. The case addressed
inters generation equity in the context of the state management of public
forest land. In a novel situation under Philippine law, the Supreme Court
permitted Class action brought by Filipino children acting as representatives
for themselves and future generations. The petitioners wanted to halt timber
cutting by government licensees of the remaining natural forests. Plaintiffs
alleged that the present and continued logging violated the right to a healthy
environment under the Philippine Constitution and would entail irreparable
harm to them and the future generations of the nations. The court
considered the issue of intergenerational responsibility and decided that the

petitioners had locus standi i.e were qualified to sue, on behalf of present
and future generations in the Philippines.
The bold step by the Philippines Supreme Court by using intergenerational
consideration as the basis for its decision regarding natural resources
exploitation indicated that rights and interests of future generations are
being treated as legal issue.

It was in the another landmark case is the G.R Simon Vs union of India where
the Court recognized that wild life forms part of our cultural heritage in the
same manner as other archeological monuments such as paintings, literature
and every animal has a role in maintaining ecological balance and the
contention (of the petitioners) that certain animals are detrimental to human
life is misconceived.

Q3.B
Ans: Producers' Duties: Producers are obliged to place only safe products on
the market. Within the limits of their respective activities, producers shall:
1.provide consumers with information to enable them to assess the risks
inherent in a product throughout the normal or reasonably foreseeable
period of its use, where such risks are not immediately obvious without
adequate warnings, and to take precautions against those risks. Provision of
such warnings does not, however, exempt any person from compliance with
the other requirements in this Directive; and
2.adopt measures commensurate with the characteristics of the products
that they supply, to enable consumers to be informed of risks that these
products might present and to take appropriate action, including, if
necessary, withdrawing the product in question from the market.
3. The measures include, for example, whenever appropriate:
*marking of the products or product batches in such a way that they can be
identified;
*sample testing of marketed products; and
*investigating complaints made and keeping distributors informed of such
monitoring.
PROS
-these producers duties helps the consumer
1. The right to safety;

2. The right to be informed;

3. The right to choose; and
4. The right to be heard
CONS
-the implementation of the regulations is always questionable.
-the monitoring is always shaky.
In your judgment which theory is most adequate?
3. The measures include, for example, whenever appropriate:
*marking of the products or product batches in such a way that they can be
identified;
*sample testing of marketed products; and
*investigating complaints made and keeping distributors informed of such
monitoring.
The producers can be partner in protecting the consumer rights by adopting
the following responsibility :
- Quality of Material;
- Safety and precision of material;
- After sales service;
- Training if needed;
- Warranty and Guaranty to be properly implemented;
- Insurance against non working or accident;
- Businesses and Producers have responsibilities
RIGHT to expect laws and regulations to be essential and efficient
-RESPONSIBILITY to provide safe products and services, information choice
and a fair hearing
-RESPONSIBILITY to practice and promote ethical marketplace behavior
Are there any marketing areas where one theory is more appropriate than
other?
3. The measures include, for example, whenever appropriate:
*marking of the products or product batches in such a way that they can be
identified;
*sample testing of marketed products; and
*investigating complaints made and keeping distributors informed of such
monitoring.
THIS THEORY CAN BE USED WITH THE MARKETING APPLICATIONS,
LIKE

-new product development.

-customer service.

Q4.A
Ans: Discrimination in its originally, morally neutral, sense means "to
distinguish one object from another" but the word has acquired judgmental
and morally accusatory connotations in connection with wrongful acts of
discrimination historically victimizing African Americans; women; Hispanics,
Asians, and Native Americans; and the disabled. Such morally invidious
discrimination may be defined as "the wrongful act of distinguishing illicitly
among people not on the basis of individual merit but on the basis of
prejudice or some other morally invidious attitude." Such morally invidious
discrimination has three key features: (1) not being based on individual
merit; (2) deriving from some morally unjustified attitude; and (3) having a
harmful or negative impact on the interests of those against whom it is
directed. Harmful impacts of job discrimination include, most importantly,
loss of jobs, promotions, and pay. Its past and present victims include
religious groups, ethnic groups, racial groups, and sexual groups. Further
distinctions may be drawn
between isolated and institutionalized discrimination; and
between intentional and unintentional discrimination. Initial movements
against and attempts to remedy job discrimination through Equal
Opportunity measures focused principally on instances of isolated
intentional discrimination; current Affirmative Action policies attempt to
address problems of institutionalized unintentional discrimination. Equal
Opportunity remedies are unable to adequately address these forms of
discrimination because it is generally impossible to tell, for a given
individual, whether that individuals loss of the job, raise, or promotion was
due to systematic discrimination or random factors. Statistical measures
of what happens to groups in hiring, compensation, and promotion, however,
amply evidence that institutionalized unintentional discrimination still exists.
Average income comparisons, lowest income comparisons, and lowest
income comparisons continue to show differences in compensation,
promotion and hiring that are not wholly explainable in terms of educational
and other merit-related factors. Furthermore, rather than being on the
decline (as is commonly believed), statistical measures indicate that such
disparities are actually increasing. Current and expected trends also seem
unfavorable to women's and minorities prospects. Women continue to be

concentrated in traditionally female (and lower paid) occupations and childbearing and child-rearing responsibilities continue to interfere with career
continuity and advancement and continue to fall, predominantly, on women.
Minorities' prospects for economic advancement are hampered by declining
availability of jobs with relatively low educational requirements together with
continued disparities in the quality of educational opportunities afforded to
these minorities. Velasquez concludes, "Unless we embark on some major
changes, the situation for minorities and women will not improve" (387).
Such enduring inequalities of status, position, power, wealth, and income as
those just canvassed seem, on their face, violations of the principle that all
"are created equal" and endowed with equal rights to "life, liberty, and the
pursuit of happiness." Indeed, it is precisely historical violations of this
principle -- in the form of unequal treatment of minorities and women -which seem to underlie the current disadvantaged statuses of minorities and
women. African Americans brought to this country as slaves, for instance,
were not recognized as people, and no legal powers, and were deemed by
the Supreme Court to be "so far inferior that they had no rights that the
white man was bound to respect" (Dred Scott v. Sanford: 1857). A woman,
through much of the 19th century, could not vote, serve on juries, or bring
suit in their own names; once married she was forbidden to hold property in
her own name and according to the Supreme Court had "no legal existence
apart from her husband, who was regarded as her head and representative
in the social state."

Q4.B
Ans: Kohlberg used these findings to reject traditional character education
practices. These approaches are premised in the idea that virtues and vices
are the basis to moral behavior, or that moral character is comprised of a
"bag of virtues", such as honesty, kindness, patience, strength, etc.
According to the traditional approach, teachers are to teach these virtues
through example and direct communication of convictions, by giving
students an opportunity to practice these virtues, and by rewarding their
expression. However, critiques of the traditional approach find flaws inherent
in this model. This approach provides no guiding principle for defining what
virtues are worthy of espousal, and wrongly assumes a community
consensus on what are considered "positive values". In fact, teachers often
end up arbitrarily imposing certain values depending upon their societal,
cultural, and personal beliefs. In order to address this issue of ethical
relativity, some have adopted the values-clarification approach to moral
education. This teaching practice is based on the assumption that there are
no single, correct answers to ethical dilemmas, but that there is value in

holding clear views and acting accordingly. In addition, there is a value of

toleration of divergent views. It follows, then, that the teacher's role is one of
discussion moderator, with the goal of teaching merely that people hold
different values; the teacher does attempt to present her views as the "right"
views.
Kohlberg rejected the focus on values and virtues, not only due to the lack of
consensus on what virtues are to be taught, but also because of the complex
nature of practicing such virtues. For example, people often make different
decisions yet hold the same basic moral values. Kohlberg believed a better
approach to affecting moral behavior should focus on stages of moral
development. These stages are critical; as they consider the way a person
organizes their understanding of virtues, rules, and norms, and integrates
these into a moral choice (Power, Higgins, & Kohlberg, 1989). In addition, he
rejected the relativist view point in favor of the view that certain principles of
justice and fairness represent the pinnacle of moral maturity, as he found
that these basic moral principles are found in different cultures and
subcultures around the world (Kohlberg & Turiel, 1971).
The goal of moral education, it then follows, is to encourage individuals to
develop to the next stage of moral reasoning. Initial educational efforts
employing Kohlberg's theory were grounded in basic Piagetian assumptions
of cognitive development. Development, in this model, is not merely the
result of gaining more knowledge, but rather consists of a sequence of
qualitative changes in the way an individual thinks. Within any stage of
development, thought is organized according to the constraints of that stage.
An individual then interacts with the environment according to their basic
understandings of the environment. However, the child will at some point
encounter information which does not fit into their world view, forcing the
child to adjust their view to accommodate this new information. This process
is called equilibration, and it is through equilibration that development
occurs. Early moral development approaches to education, therefore, sought
to force students to ponder contradiction inherent to their present level of
moral reasoning.

Q5.A
Ans: ''In view of contractual agreement that every employee makes to be
loyal to the Employer''
THIS IS NOT TRUE. THE CONTRACT IS NOT FOR LOYALTY.
The employment relationship is a legal notion widely used in countries
around the world to refer to the relationship between a person called an

"employee" (frequently referred to as "a worker") and an "employer", for

whom the employee performs work under certain conditions in return for
remuneration. It is through the employment relationship, however defined,
that reciprocal rights and obligations are created between the employee and
the employer.
The employment relationship has been, and continues to be, the main
vehicle through which workers gain access to the rights and benefits
associated with employment in the areas of labor law and social security. It is
the key point of reference for determining the nature and extent of
employers' rights and obligations towards their workers.

Q5.B
Ans: In environmental point of view, where my ethic point of view strongly
relies on, on international auto companies to submit plans for an small
automobile enough to carry three people, rugged enough to commute across
poor maintained roads across nation generating a minimum pollution
automobile costing less than $5,000 dollars is not such a good idea. The
worlds market for energy particularly oil, was based in part on the fact that
China, with its large population, was using relatively low levels of energy.
China would be consuming twice the amount of oil the United States
currently uses if China ever reaches even the modest per person
consumptions level of South Korea. Electric cars

Q6.A
Ans: Utilitarianism is the view that so long as an action provides me with
more measurable economic benefits than costs, the action is morally right.
Utilitarian Principle: The morally correct action is the one that maximizes net
social benefits, where net social benefits equals social benefits minus social
costs.
Focus: the ends (results) of an action

Maximize net social benefits

Social benefits (good)

Social costs (harm)

 Most good & least harm for everyone

Consider all good & all harm

Everyone who is affected (not private benefits & costs, rather

social benefits & costs)

Economic & non-economic

Example: loss of income (economic)

Example: pain & suffering (non-economic)

Present & future

Whether easily measured or not

Q6.B
Ans:
Pollution is the contamination of air, water, or earth by harmful substances.
Concern for pollution developed alongside concerns for the environment in
general. The advent of automobiles, increased chemical wastes, nuclear
wastes, and accumulation of garbage in landfills created a need for
legislation specifically aimed at decreasing pollution.
POLLUTION WERE DAMAGING THE HEALTH OF THE PEOPLE
AND THE HEALTH OF THE COUNTRY. HENCE THE POLLUTION LAWS
ARE NECESSARY EVILS, WHICH WILL HELP/ MANAGE THOSE
WHO ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE POLLUTION.
Among the landmark acts designed to preserve our environment is the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act;
-a comprehensive regulatory statute aimed at controlling solid waste
disposal.
-The Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 aims to safely dispose of nuclear
wastes.
-The Clear Air Act was first enacted in 1970; it was later amended in 1977
and again in 1990; with its present form embodied in. Like these examples
demonstrate, most environmental regulations are federal in nature.
Among the types of pollution, the one that has existed longer than any other
is water pollution. Its consequences are readily seen when pollutants reach
groundwater reservoirs, creating serious health hazards to people drinking

the water. The current version of the Federal Clean Water Act is another tool.
environmental law: an overview
THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT [NEPA]
THE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY IMPROVEMENT ACT
THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION ACT
THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA]
were passed in 1970.
The main objective of these federal enactments was to assure that the
environment be protected against both public and private actions that failed
to take account of costs or harms inflicted on the eco-system.
The EPA is supposed to monitor and analyze the environment, conduct
research, and work closely with state and local governments to devise
pollution control policies. NEPA has been described as one of Congress's
most far reaching environmental legislation ever passed. The basic purpose
of NEPA is to force governmental agencies to consider the effects of their
decisions on the environment.
State laws also reflect the same concerns and common law actions allow
adversely affected property owners to seek a judicial remedy for
environmental harms.
THESE LAWS DO NOT violate people right to liberty and right to property.
ON THE CONTRARY, THESE LAWS SAVES THE LIVES OF MANY
AND ALSO THE FUTURE GENERATION.

Q6.C
Ans: Nonwage characteristics of jobs play a role in employment decisions;
workers often trade wages for job security, status, and other job attributes
Everyone agrees that the quality of jobs differs, but determining if one job is
better than another can lead to great debate. Whether jobs have qualities
deemed positive ("good jobs") or negative ("bad jobs") depends on the
criteria used to evaluate the job as well as who does the evaluation.
Economists focus their good jobs-bad jobs debate on wages, while
individuals, as well as counselors and psychologists, who are primarily
concerned with a comprehensive view of an individual's well-being, also
consider the importance of job satisfaction, job security, and many other
factors.
This article discusses the effect of nonwage attributes of jobs on the
perceptions of job quality. It broadens the good jobs-bad jobs debate by

considering factors in addition to wages which may be important to

individuals in determining the quality of their jobs. The intention is not to
detract from concerns about the economic benefits of work, but to highlight
important aspects of job quality other than wages.
Individual values
Individuals consider a multitude of factors in addition to earnings when
characterizing a job as "good" or "bad." For purposes of this discussion, these
factors are grouped into five categories: job duties and working conditions,
job satisfaction, period of work, job status, and job security. Although many
of the factors are associated with specific occupations, it is important to
remember that they can vary within an occupation. Just as earnings may
have a wide range within an occupation, so may working conditions, job
security, and determinants of job satisfaction.
The value individuals place on different job attributes varies and is
determined by many factors. These values are derived from the socioeconomic background and the environment in the geographic area in which
they live. In addition, different interests, perceived abilities, and interests in
activities other than work, such as leisure or family responsibilities, result in
individuals viewing the quality of a job from different perspectives.
It is not surprising that there is great diversity in how jobs are valued. This
country's population has very diverse backgrounds. People live in inner
cities, suburban areas, and rural areas. The population includes foreign born
immigrants, sons and daughters of immigrants of different cultures, and
those whose ancestors have been in the country for many generations.
Educational attainment varies from high school dropouts to recipients of
doctorate and other advanced degrees. Family economic backgrounds range
from the very wealthy to those living in poverty. Each background would
influence a person's perspective of the quality of his or her job.
Individuals from these diverse backgrounds have widely different interests
and abilities. Some have artistic and creative talents, others work well with
their hands. Some people are endowed with above-average intellectual
abilities, and some are not. Some like to work with people, others prefer to
work alone. Some prefer to work outdoors, others like an office environment.
Structured working conditions are preferred by some, while others prefer
unstructured conditions. Each individual reflects a unique combination of
interests and abilities.
Job characteristics
Just as individuals differ, the characteristics of jobs differ. Many job
characteristics are commonly perceived to be positive and others negative.
Hazardous conditions and lack of job security are viewed by most workers as
negative. However, all jobs with these characteristics are not undesirable.
Playing professional football, for example, is certainly hazardous to one's
health and lacks job security, but most athletes are not deterred from
pursuing a professional career in the National Football League because of
this.

Whether job characteristics are deemed negative or positive depends on

each individual's personal view. For example, artistic jobs are viewed as
desirable by many, but common perception does not indicate that nonartistic
jobs are undesirable. Nevertheless, someone without artistic talent would
likely be extremely frustrated in a job which required artistic abilities.
The following discussion defines some characteristics that may determine an
individual's perception of a job's desirability. Nonwage benefits that translate
into earnings, such as employer-paid health insurance, employer
contributions to pension plans, and paid vacations, are not discussed,
although, like earnings, they are important to a job's desirability. Some job
attributes that relate to earnings, such as advancement opportunities, are
discussed. Commonly held perceptions of the effect of a characteristic on job
quality and specific occupations associated with the characteristic also are
included.