<p>
</p>
<p>In the end, it’s somebody looking after himself. The employer certainly won’t be doing that.</p>
<p>Would your logic be any different if there was a significant difference in salary?</p>
<p>
In what way? Until he takes the offer there is nothing he is morally obligated to reveal to the initial company. He is supposed to feel guilty for considering another employer? No.</p>
<p>
It really wasn’t because those two statements were not especially related. I mentioned “error” as a possibility with respect to your general but apparent absolutism regarding one’s word - I never said that the OP’s (i.e. your) hypothetical situation constituted an error.</p>
<p>I mentioned honesty as being the preferable course of action in no small part because I feel that it is the mutually beneficial path, and therefore a superior option to a sense of “honor” that will likely cost the individual years of their life that they cannot get back, and cost the employer thousands of dollars in training and other expenses.</p>
<p>
Worse than the ones who have just been garden-variety miserable, I have watched someone walk the “honorable path” all the way to divorce, because it turns out that going in every day to a job you don’t want because it is the “honorable” thing to do has a very telling effect on you, your family, and your coworkers. I’ve seen your path too, and it looks a lot worse to me.</p>
<p>
Well then, it’s a good thing that it was all a sham so that you could feel self-righteous, isn’t it?</p>
<p>By the way, nice to see that whole “honor” thing doesn’t include not lying to people offering help on a message board.</p>
<p>Ken285,
Why would my logic be different? I feel the hypothetical young man shouldn’t have taken the interview with “company B” in the first place. The ink wasn’t even dry on his acceptance of “company A’s” offer. </p>
<p>At some point people need to take responsibility for their actions. He knew which companies he wanted to interview with. He knew what range of salary would be acceptable to him. When something from column A matched up with something from column B, he accepted the job. He essentially committed to an exclusive relationship at that point. </p>
<p>Where does this behavior stop? If a boy agrees to an exclusive relationship with a girl, is it OK if he courts a prettier girl on the way home? Morality does not demand the boy eventually marry his new steady girlfriend, but it does demand he give that relationship a chance to grow.</p>
<p>The trail we leave behind us can pay dividends or be a recurring loss to our worth in the industry. It’s a small world. I’m in the semiconductor world and I am constantly amazed at how small it is. You don’t want to leave a trail of empty promises.</p>
<p>I realize it’s hard for someone starting out, but they must understand it’s not about the money. It’s about doing something they enjoy. It’s about working with engaging, energetic and interesting people. It’s about contributing to and being part of something larger than themselves. It’s about selecting places to work that will challenge them and enable them to grow as an engineer and as an individual.</p>
<p>Of course seek good compensation, but that’s only a piece of a much larger puzzle.</p>
<p>
Ah… That explains your preference towards bigger company vs small ones on the other thread…</p>
<p>Anyway. this happened to me. I started my first job, the second week I got a call from my current job and I declined – all because of that “ethics.”
Just from my experience, it took me 3 years of my life trying to get to where I work now because of that “honesty” or “ethics”.
What a waste of time. They did not care. No one care!</p>
<p>
Why be loyal to someone who would throw you aside in an instant? Call that what you will, but it seems like naivete to me.
Sadly, it’s the way things seem to be nowadays.</p>
<p>“Company loyalty” is an oxymoron, both directions. IF the company signed an agreement promising to keep me on for X years (unless proven that my job performance was unsatisfactory), THEN I would agree that the employee “owes” the company his or her loyalty. Without that condition, the employee is absolutely a free agent who can look for other work.</p>
<p>Yep. Such is the state of modern American economics: do what is profitable with no regards to anything else.</p>
<p>
I read an article not too long ago noting that with American business law, a CEO who did the “morality correct” thing instead of the “most profitable” thing could not only get fired but in fact massively sued by the stockholders.</p>
<p>So what WOULD the ethical thing be to do? Stay one month? One year? One decade? What if you think the ship is going down? Are you obligated to stay to help right it?</p>
<p>A month before my husband and I were laid off the same day at our company, he asked our supervisor if we had anything to worry about. “No, not at all! You’re fine!” I guess we should have followed our intuition, but we stuck it out. Thank God we didn’t have children yet.</p>
<p>
In a way, case in point. Another problem with this is that economic decisions by corporate interests are extremely short-sighted with no regards to long-term consequences.</p>
<p>
The morally correct thing to do would be to honor your agreement (and depending on the loyalty of the employer, possibly an implied one). If you’re not sure, you don’t make such an agreement. </p>
<p>
I’ll assume that if your supervisor gave you an OK, then he thought you did a pretty good job at work.
And then we come full circle back to the problem: trashing workers because seniority=benefits and a new worker is cheaper. Very much a short-sighted economic decision(good senior employees are more than worth the premium) and a staple of modern American business.</p>
<p>Fun Fact. I was in this situation recently (college sophomore) and when the second company called asking for an interview, it slipped that I accepted another offer from a different company, but I made it clear I was more interested in the second company. The second company then proceeded to say “if you gave your word to them, you should probably be work for them. We would hate it if someone canceled on us to go somewhere else.” I ended up staying with company one.</p>
<p>@EddieD - you are a sophomore, was this for an internship?</p>
<p>For what it’s worth, my opinion: that companies act in their own interest (a) doesn’t make it right and (b) doesn’t make it right for employees to behave similarly. If a company says they’re going to hire somebody, they should, if they can; similarly, if an employee says they’re going to work for somebody, they should, if they can. It’s the “if they can” part that makes philosophy harder than engineering.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>To an extent, I agree with you about not burning bridges, but to me that’s a practical consideration rather than a moral concept. In the end, you’re still looking after yourself first, not the company.</p>
<p>At what point do you draw the line about withdrawing from offers? Ok, so the ink isn’t dry yet, so I can understand the argument. What about in a year? Or five years? Especially in this economy, many people will take any job because that’s what’s acceptable to them. What if they get an offer that’s 50% higher? Do they still stay with the first company? That’s a fool to me if there ever was one. You always have to look after yourself and your family first.</p>
<p>I disagree that he essentially committed to an exclusive relationship with the company.</p>
<p>Yes, its more than just about money. Are you implying it’s ok to switch companies if you’re going to a better company overall? </p>
<p>If a boy commits to an exclusive relationship with a girl and he’s already courting somebody else, then the relationship is doomed to begin with. Why go through the motions if they already know it won’t work out well in the end? You can make the case that it would be morally wrong for the boy to lead the girl on.</p>
<p>The industry in my area is dominated by half a dozen firms where everybody knows each other. In the past, there was an unwritten rule that none of these firms would hire somebody away from another one of these firms. However, nowadays, you see people switching among these companies all the time. Company loyalty is dead.</p>
<p>I guess different people have different outlooks on life. As a general rule, I don’t take anybody’s word (unless they’ve shown that they can be trusted). The same goes for the business side. We hire subcontractors for our construction projects and the legal agreements with them are over 1000 pgs each. And you know what? Every single word counts. You wouldn’t believe how many times I’ve had to point out small clauses in the contract to get what they owed to us. We’ve had workers try to claim an extra half hour’s wage for standby when standby wasn’t required. We had to go through the union agreement to prove our case. If there were “ethics” and “morals” in business, we wouldn’t need so many signatures, contracts and agreements!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What’s right or wrong is defined by what society considers acceptable. Clearly, we are at a point where the tide is turning. I’m sure if you brought this up for discussion 25 years ago, you would get a different response.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And what if the agreement didn’t say how long you have to work for? I know none of mine did.</p>
<p>For what it is worth THIS is one of several reasons that engineers don’t make as much money as they are worth. Sales, Marketing and Finance people don’t worry about “the ethics of it all.” And if you want another personall story, I was laid off 3 days after signing a mortgage. My boss knew I was signing a mortgage because I had to take extra time at lunch. He was bound by company policy not to tell me in advance.</p>
<p>
As long as you would normally stay for a job.
Of course, it’s not like businesses really look out for their employees, so I’d be less inclined to honor such an implicit agreement.</p>
<p>
I’d say it’s an ultimately destructive habit made by people who know about finance rather than engineering. Looks good in the short-term, but talented people are worth their cost.</p>
<p>
That’s one of the most ridiculous statements I’ve ever heard… people shouldn’t act in their own interest??? In who’s interest are we acting then, this company that we barely met??? There are so many things wrong with that I won’t even go into it.</p>
<p>I do find it rather interesting all the people who talk of “honor” in a capitalist system that is, by definition, designed for everyone (people/corporations/etc.) to pursuit their own self-interest. Maybe I’m biased because I live in California, but whole the idea that there’s even an ethical dilemma in someone trying to find a better job, regardless of their current employment situation, is rather strange.</p>
<p>If you want to talk about ethical dilemmas: in California, non-compete clauses are illegal, which means you can quit your job at Company A and take all your knowledge and expertise in Company A’s operations to their most bitter rival, Company B, with no problems. NOW you’re into some ethical gray areas, but interviewing for a job while being hired by another company is a total non-issue in my opinion. You should always be on the lookout for a better job.</p>
<p>Because people pursuing their own self-interests never does hurt society as a whole.</p>