Winn-Dixie After Hours Lawsuit Case Study

In the sixth discussion case, “After-effects of after-hours activities: The case of Peter Oiler,” there are many ethical issues that need to be dealt with. The first and possibly most important ethical issue involved is the treatment of Lesbian, Bisexual, Gay, and Transgender people in the workplace. The Judge in this case ruled that Transgender people are not a protected class, and whether or not that is a law, we have to look at if firing this person is an ethical thing. Peter Oiler was a man at the workplace, dressed as a man in the workplace, and more importantly had an exemplary work record. Firing him over something he did outside of the workplace and had no effect on him or his company, to me is unethical. Firing someone for being LBGT is an issue that definitely requires very much attention in the near future. This case brings back memories of a Penn State Women’s Basketball player who said she was kicked off the team for allegedly being a lesbian; she also sued.

Another ethical dilemma brought up in this case is whether or not a person should be held accountable for something done outside of work hours, no where near their place of employment, and is not illegal. If the act being discussed in this case were illegal, there would be no issue to me. However, because what Peter Oiler is doing is legal, and because he is wearing nothing affiliated with Winn-Dixie or his specific job, it becomes a huge issue. Holding something responsible for their personally beliefs or actions is a very fine line that has to be trekked upon very carefully.

The main stakeholder in this case is Peter Oiler and his family/wife. They are a huge stakeholder in this case because they rely on Winn-Dixie and Peter’s job and income to support them. The case does not specifically say what Peter’s wife does for a living (if anything), but I think it is an easy assumption that Peter is the major breadwinner in his family. By firing Peter for something that has no bearing...