Administrative_Ethics_Paper

ADMINISTRATIVE ETHICS Administrative Ethics Your Name Here Instructor’s Name/HCS 335 Date Administrative Ethics Paper In this paper we will examine human resources and Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) issues as well as discuss discrimination due to health status. When hiring staff for their company, the human resource department is responsible for following the guidelines of company policy in conjunction with Equal Employment Opportunities and Affirmative Action. This aids them to choose the appropriate candidate/candidates for the job(s) free of discrimination due to race, creed, religious beliefs and gender. We have all heard a lot about both of these policies, but what are they exactly and how do they work' “The Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) prohibits specific types of job discrimination in certain workplaces. EEOC is an independent federal agency that promotes equal opportunity in employment through administrative and judicial enforcement of the federal civil rights laws and through education and technical assistance. EEOC protects applicants and employees of many private employers, state and local governments, educational institutions, employment agencies, and labor organizations (United States Department of Labor, 2009, pg 2) while “Affirmative action is an effort to develop a systematic approach to eliminate the current and lingering effects of prior discrimination. It is a race and sex conscious effort to achieve equal employment opportunity for all race sex groups in a workforce (State of South Carolina, 2009, p. 1). In addition the HR Guide, (1999) “Disparate Treatment is Title VII prohibits employers from treating applicants or employees differently because of their membership in a protected class. The vital issue is whether the employer's actions were motivated by discriminatory intent, which may be proved by either direct or conditional evidence (p.1). To clarify, disparity “is a theory of liability that prohibits an employer from using a facially neutral employment practice that has an unjustified adverse impact on members of a protected class. A facially neutral employment practice does not appear to be discriminatory on its face; rather is discriminatory in its application or effect ("Disparate Impact," 2011, p.1.)”. What are some examples of disparate treatment' According to Labornotes.org they include: * Suspending worker A for speeding while giving no punishment to worker B. * Firing worker A for absenteeism while allowing other substance-abusing employees to enter treatment programs * Firing worker A for fighting while allowing worker B to enter a last-chance agreement. * Firing worker A after a single warning, while giving worker B two warnings before firing.” Disparate practices include written tests, height and weight requirements, educational requirements and one-sided measures, such as interviews (HR Guide, 1999). In order to avoid disparity issues, human resource professionals need keep abreast of all current administrative issues as well as learn any new information that can affect staffing and all aspects of company benefits and requirements. What about a person’s health status' Should a person be treated differently due to a disease or condition that does not incapacitate them in the performance of their job' While the web site Breastcancer.org deals with people who have suffered with breast cancer, it states that “Biased actions, such as passing up a capable employee for a promotion, paying employees unequally for the same job, or even off-colored jokes or comments, can be considered discrimination. It’s illegal for an employer to treat capable employees differently due to health status.” Our medical information, in the wrong hands, can cause problems for us not only in our life outside the office, but on the job as well even though it isn’t right. How can we safeguard our information from becoming ammunition against us' Fortunately there are some safety measures in place that can protect our information from getting in the wrong hands. The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act or HIPAA, passed by Congress in 1996 has set forth certain rules and regulations concerning how medical information is handled and released. Due to the advent of Electronic Medical Records (EMR’s) information can be accessed by the click of a few buttons. After five years of determining what the rules on privacy were to be, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services enacted the HIPAA Privacy Rule which deals with privacy, confidentiality, data standards and integrity, as well as data security. HIPAA has impacted all aspects of medical records from how the information is collected, the rules on how it can be shared and the actual storage of both physical and electronic data storage. These stringent restrictions have been activated to protect individuals from many different problems including the issue of loss of health insurance after leaving employment. Authority of the government has been strengthened when fraud and abuse has been discovered. Some of the dangers that still exist as far as security are that dishonest staff members might see a way to make some easy money by divulging medical information. If this is the case, HIPAA has set forth consequences for such activity which will be strictly enforced. In addition HIPAA has given the patients certain rights as to accessing their own medical records. Prior to the passing of HIPAA only some states allowed individuals to have copies of their own medical records. Medical facilities are now required to notify an individual as to how their personal information is disclosed or utilized giving them the right and opportunity to file a complaint if they do not agree with how their information is being handled. This includes revealing information to an employer. While HIPAA has indeed provided better protection of a patient’s rights, it also has weaknesses. Not only has it caused complexity and impacted matters financially, it may have also adversely affected patient care. According to an article dated August 18, 2003, in the Washington Post, "Patient Privacy Rules Bring Wide Confusion: New Directives Often Misunderstood" contends that there are often “frequent misunderstandings” of the HIPAA rules. This has resulted in “frustration, uncertainty and anxiety in doctors' offices, clinics, hospitals and even pharmacies across the country." Vital medical information is sometimes not able to get into the hands of those who need it to treat their patients. However, even though there are some glitches in the system, HIPAA has by far protected patients and their families better than any other measures that have ever been utilized. Because of so much identity theft and the potential for adverse health information to be used against a person at their place of employment, all health care professionals should diligently adhere to the guidelines that HIPAA provides to maintain the privacy of each and every one of their patients. Reference/Resources ACE. Impact of the HIPAA Privacy Rule on Academic Research. Retrieved from http://www.acenet.edu/AM/Template.cfm'Section=Home&CONTENTID= 10385&TEMPLATE=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm  (2008). Breastcancer.org. Retrieved from http://www.breastcancer.org/tips/your_job/discrimination.jsp HR Guide. (1999). EEO: Disparate treatment. Retrieved from http://www.hr-guide.com/data/G701.htm Disparate Impact. (2011). Other Free Encyclopedias. Retrieved from http://law.jrank.org/pages/6188/Disparate-Impact.html Labor notes. (2009). Proving disparate treatment. Retrieved from http://labornotes.org/node/2523 The National Academies Press. (2010). Effect of HIPAA privacy rule on health research. Retrieved from http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php'record_id=12458&page=199 Schwartz, R. (2009). Labor notes. Retrieved from http://labornotes.org/node/2523 State of South Carolina. (2009). Affirmative action. Retrieved from http://www.state.sc.us/schac/affirmative_action.htm Stein, R. (2003, August 18). Patient Privacy Rules Bring Wide Confusion: New Directives Often Misunderstood. Washington Post, N/A . United States Department of Labor. (2009). Equal employment opportunity. Retrieved from http://www.dol.gov/dol/topic/discrimination/index.htm