What is legal may not be ethical nor right

In the field of human resource management and labor relations, as well as in government service, decisions should not only be based on whether solutions are legal or not. There are other factors to consider in decision-making.  The first dimension is technical feasibility. A solution must be practicable. The second factor is financial soundness. A solution must be affordable. It must pass the cost-benefit analysis, that is: That the prospective benefits should exceed its cost. The third criterion is legal viability, can the solution stand legal test and judicial scrutiny?  And fourth, is ethics and moral propriety.

There is no need to dwell on the first and second factors. They are largely self-explanatory. But we need to take a closer look on the third and fourth dimension of effective decision-making. The issue of legality is easier to address because the letter and the spirit of the laws clearly spell out what the law allows and what the law prohibits. The legislative intent also indicates what good and what benefit the law wants to attain, as well as what evil it seeks to avoid. Any confusion or doubt in the interpretation and implementation of the law can be easily resolved by looking at the journal of legislative proceedings.

For instance, in the matter of hiring people, the law prohibits discrimination on the basis of gender, race, and religion. Also, Labor Law disallows discrimination intended to encourage or discourage union membership. But many companies do make decisions in hiring against women. For female personnel are entitled to too many benefits that are not required for males. There are companies today that, under the guise of exercising management prerogative to choose personnel based on their own discretion, silently they disqualify women purposely mainly because of cost considerations.

It can easily be demonstrated that employers spend more in hiring women. The female personnel enjoy a lot more benefits than men. Examples include maternity benefits of 60 days for normal delivery, and 78 days for delivery by cesarean section, leaves for battered women (RA 9262) of 10 days with full pay, and OB-GYNE leave  (RA 9710) of 60 days with full pay, as well as solo parents leave (RA 8972).  While it is legal to exercise management prerogative of choice, it is not ethical to shut off women just because of cost consideration.

In transferring personnel, there are many ethical factors to consider. While it is perfectly legal to move people around, provided that transfers do not entail demotion in rank or diminution in salary and benefits, the prerogative to transfer must also consider the grave implications of removing fathers and mothers from their young children, the psychological impact on growing children arising from moving to new homes and schools, disrupting classes and friendships, and creating separation anxieties in the minds of the young. A simple decision to transfer personnel may be legally defensible, and yet, it entails far-reaching effects on the behavior of employees and their family.

In the private sectors, as well as in government, decisions may pass judicial scrutiny, but may break the unwritten rules of ethics and exceed the bounds of propriety and good customs and morals. In short, one action which may be deemed legal, can be downright unethical, improper and unbecoming.  There are decisions that can be defended in Plaza Miranda, but cannot pass the test of good manners, the test of  ''delicadeza."