I have noticed several costumers that use state-issued credit cards to return some of the goods for cash to buy things that are not allowed by welfare. They will typically buy their goods at one person then return and go to a different person to return the goods and get cash back. Some of the things that they buy with the cash are tobacco or alcohol and or other hardware goods that they cannot buy on the welfare credit card. Do I turn them into the state and risk the state coming into our store and causing mass problems, or do I let it go and potentially hurt our stores’ name for letting cheating transpire?
After all, we don’t have to do anything special to accept the welfare credit card and that brings more money to the store. Ethical Problem or Issue The problem is that the people on welfare aren’t hurting anyone or anything. If we start to bother them about what they are doing, they may leave and never come back to the store causing the store to lose money. If we turn them into the state they may want names and to look at our records (which is fine, but a hassle) or even bring undercover representatives that could cause more harm than good.
To not report is also bad for the company, some people are already aware of what is happening which could bring in more welfare people to abuse the system and give the company a bad name. Solutions I could (1) do nothing and just let these people continue to do what they are doing and hope it doesn’t get out of control. I could (2) report them to the state and hope that it doesn’t cause a lot of headache for the store. I could (3) pursue tracking and talking to the individuals that are cheating the system to try and persuade them to stop without any negative reactions.
Outcomes 1 & 2 If I do nothing (1), then nothing will change and people on welfare will continue to cheat the system. If I report (2) to the state what is happening they will surely get involved since this is a direct violation of the use of welfare. This could cause all sorts of problems at the store and make it difficult for everyone including the people on welfare. Likely Impact 1 & 2 The outcome for solutions (1) would again be that nothing changes and the people on welfare continue to abuse the system.
In best case scenario, only the small group of people on welfare will continue to do this and it won’t spread to other people on welfare. Worst case scenario, it gets out to other people on welfare and that’s all that comes to the store anymore and the state is forced to come in and do something about it. Reporting to the state (2) the situation they would definitely want to know the names of the people that are abusing the system. If we give them the names of the people that are abusing the system those people could potentially get cut off from needed resources that help them to survive.
If they get cut off from welfare they could turn to a life of crime or worse. The state could also implement a new system or software that tracks welfare that would cost more time and slower lines at the registers costing the company money. Values 1 & 2 Turning a blind eye (1) to what these people on welfare isn’t helping anyone. It is costing the taxpayer to keep these people on welfare that obviously don’t need that much money if they are just spending it on tobacco and alcohol. The companies name is also getting hurt by this by allowing it to continue, it’s ethically wrong to be cheating.
Getting the state government involved (2) is always a bad situation. The government doesn’t run anything well and will likely make it hard for everyone. This will cost the company money by having slower lines at the registers. The people on welfare could be restricted even more or restricted to certain brands that will make it harder for them to find the resources they need. Outcomes 3 I myself know that cheating is bad and nobody likes it. I should take the initiative to talk to these people while they are in the register lines and just have normal talks with them.
If they come back into the store talk with them again and ask if the products didn’t work for them so soon. Likely Impact 3 By talking to the people that are on welfare they know that you are watching them and what they are getting. This alone might be enough to persuade them to stop bringing the products back for money. If they do return talk with them again so that they know you just talked to them and now you are talking to them again reinforcing the idea that you are watching them.
This will likely cause them to stop bringing things back or at least make them go home first so that it is more of a hassle to come back to return the products to get cash. If those two things don’t help force all returns to go through managers’ approval that way it can easily be tracked what is being returned and by who. Returned items are only good for in-store credit and can’t be used for tobacco and alcohol. This should deter almost all of the cheating going on. Values 3 People are on welfare because they need help. When people abuse or cheat the system hurts everyone.
It hurts the taxpayers and it is enabling the people on welfare to not try and improve their lives. This could make it right for the people on welfare as well as the company. The company won’t have to restock the shelves needlessly and the people on welfare are more prone to staying on the straight and narrow. This also helps the regular customers by always having all the product on the shelves so that they can get the products they want. Evaluation Of the three solutions doing nothing is the easiest, but it hurts the taxpayers and enables the people on welfare that are abusing the system to continue.
As long as it doesn’t spread to all people on welfare it won’t be a problem, but I think it will get out of hand and be bad business for the company with a tarnished name. Getting the state involved is just a terrible and somewhat unknown idea. There are no telling what things they will come up with to fix the situation. Most cases when the government is involved whatever the poorest idea you could imagine is generally what they will do. This hurts everyone from the person on welfare to the taxpayer and all of the companies in the state.
As long as the problem isn’t too big handling it on a case by case basis would be easy to handle at one store. Something as simple as talking can make all the difference in the world. Decision My decision is to handle this myself and talk to the people who are on welfare and abusing the system. It will likely deter many from abusing the system or at least from abusing the system at my store. If the people are returning and talking to them isn’t enough, making it to where they have to come to the front counter to return their products will deter even more.
If that doesn’t work tracking products and the names of the individuals that are constantly abusing the system could force us to implement an in-store credit that is not good for tobacco and alcohol. This last step should catch the rest of the individuals that are willing to continually cheat. This is very similar to what my grandfather taught me when I was young. He had lost the key to the lock on the shed and called a locksmith to get it open. I was there when the locksmith came and unlocked the shed in just a second!
I was shocked and asked my grandfather why he locked it if it was so easy to break into. My grandfather told me that the lock was to keep honest people honest. I was very confused by this and asked him to explain. He told me that about 1% of the population will always be honest no matter what. He went on to tell me that also about 1% of the population will always be dishonest. This 1% will always find a way to cheat and steal. The lock he said is for the other 98% of people. People that are honest but might be tempted by a door that was not locked.
This solution is for that 98%. Defense People that are going to find a way to cheat the system will find a way. My actions alone might show the other employees the right actions to take and they may be influenced my actions of doing the right thing. The worst outcome of all of this is that the store has less product to restock on the shelves the entire atmosphere is better because of everyone doing the right thing. On the downside, we could lose a few customers on welfare from coming to our store.
