Three times in the last month I have been the beneficiary of administrative errors that, if they stand, will save me thousands of dollars. I’m a bit pinched financially at the moment and would like to think it’s the gods smiling on me, but I wonder about my ethical obligations.
Situation 1: We receive gas and electric services from the same utility company. The most recent bill showed only the electric charges and said that the gas account had been terminated, with no explanation. But we’re still getting gas, free. Before this, the company had been estimating our gas bill — on the high side, I believe, because they incorrectly claimed they couldn’t access the meter. Do I need to inform them of their error?
Situation 2: For the second time in the last year, our landlord has not cashed our monthly rent check. The first time I reached out to let her know, and she said she couldn’t find it, and I sent a new check. (The check is mailed by the bank, and it’s highly unlikely that she didn’t receive it.) They’re nice people but apparently have enough money that they don’t notice the missing rent. How many times am I obliged to correct their oversight on this?
Situation 3: I mailed my car-registration renewal to the D.M.V., and the check was sent back with a note that said they couldn’t locate that registration. The next day I received the new registration. But the check for $194 was never cashed. It’s a bizarre occurrence, and I’m not sure I could sort it out if I wanted to, but it seems similar to the situations above in that I am receiving something that I didn’t pay for. — Name Withheld
From the Ethicist:
You’ll have to ask a lawyer about the legal implications here, but the ethical situation strikes me as pretty straightforward in each of these cases. You owe the utility company for the gas you’ve used, whether or not you were sent a bill. An honest person would alert them to their screw-up. You owe your landlord the rent. An honest person would point out that she failed to deposit your check. And the same goes for the D.M.V.: An honest person would tell the department that your check hadn’t been deposited.
A good starting place, in other words, isn’t the question of what your duties are or what the consequences will be; it’s the question of what kind of person you want to be. Still, prudence and principle are aligned here. If a check hasn’t been cashed, the other party could take the position that you never sent it and are in default. You don’t want your gas cut off. An undeposited check can be a hassle too: You’re liable for the funds of that check — you can’t freely spend the money it represents — and then, if it eventually becomes stale-dated (which often happens after six months), you’ll have to write a new one.
Because these errors are not your fault, you should not have to pay for them. You shouldn’t, for example, have to pay any interest or penalties associated with a delinquent payment. All the same, transparency will serve you best. However tempting it may be to coast on your creditors’ mistakes, you don’t want to cash out your character.
Readers Respond
The previous question was from a reader troubled by his boss’s racist, conspiratorial views. He wrote: “I work in the I.T. department of a town government, where our small team is led by a director who is a fervent conspiracy theorist. In casual conversations, the director frequently discusses bizarre ideas in a hushed, serious manner, as if revealing hidden truths: lizard people infiltrating the federal government, the Rothschilds as vampiric blood drinkers and J.F.K. Jr. secretly controlling Trump with plans for a 2024 comeback. This individual is responsible for managing and securing the municipal data of a very affluent town. The potential risks are alarming. It is not outside the realm of possibility that this alternate reality could compromise the director’s decision-making, potentially jeopardizing the security of our town’s sensitive information. When I’ve raised my concerns with both the mayor and the head of H.R., they’ve swiftly dismissed the issue and redirected the conversation. I am left in a difficult position, fearing not only for the security of our town’s data but also for my own job stability under a manager detached from reality. Is it ethical for someone in such a crucial role to openly espouse these beliefs at work?”
In his response, the Ethicist noted: “The problem with your boss, as you’ve laid out the situation, is not so much that this person expresses their beliefs as that they have them. It doesn’t seem unreasonable to worry, as you do, that someone so disconnected from reality might release information in an attempt to avert an imaginary conspiracy. And someone convinced that the mayor, say, was in on the conspiracy wouldn’t be subject to the usual mechanisms of restraint. Yet I’m struck that you’ve shared your worries with people in positions of responsibility and they clearly have a very different sense of the situation. Maybe they know your boss and have already concluded that their outlandish beliefs are, so to speak, recreational, and don’t affect their professionalism. … Given that you’ve tried getting senior management to do something about this, you’re entitled to act as a whistle-blower here and get the word out. I hope that you do.” (Reread the full question and answer here.)
⬥
As an employment lawyer, I agree with the Ethicist’s recommendation — to report the paranoid hate speech of the boss — but I disagree with his reasoning. The Ethicist says “the problem with your boss … is not so much that this person expresses their beliefs as that they have them.” I think it’s quite the opposite. The workplace, even in government, cannot (and should not) police conspiracy theories, whether the etiology is political, religious or psychiatric. Effective corrective action under the federal and state law, as well as municipal policy, would turn on the boss’s words, actions and performance, not the boss’s thoughts. As the Ethicist acknowledges, it is possible to harbor bizarre credences and still meet workplace performance criteria. The real legal question for a whistle-blower — and, arguably, also the key business/operational question — is whether the boss’s behavior or expression crosses the line into an actionable hostile work environment. — Jim
⬥
Years ago, I worked for a department director who was delusional and shared bizarre beliefs: that someone came in and rearranged the office furniture, or that someone moved her television — and most alarmingly, the notion that people were living in the crawl space of her home. There were warnings, and management ignored them, although the people who worked for her saw them and reported them, to no avail. H.R. did not believe me until she tried to run over another employee. People in responsibility need to take these types of complaints seriously. — Nancy
⬥
I would like to suggest that the letter writer put his or her concerns in writing and send the message to both H.R. and the mayor. I have learned that government entities of all types are happy to ignore things, but if they’re in writing there’s often a need for them to investigate — and they don’t want there to be a record of their ignoring a concern. — Cherie
⬥
Perhaps the letter writer should read the F.B.I. report on the bombing of a block in downtown Nashville on Christmas Day 2020. The F.B.I.’s behavioral analysts concluded that the suicide bomber, who was, coincidentally, an I.T. specialist, was driven by paranoid beliefs. Some of his “eccentric conspiracy theories,” to use the F.B.I.’s term, reportedly included a belief in lizard people. — William
⬥
The letter writer might consider recommending that the city have an outside auditor conduct regular audits of their I.T., cybersecurity and general information-security programs. — Fran
⬥
The Ethicist went the long way around the barn on this issue, but I agree with his conclusion: blow that whistle! Before the letter writer does, he should read the Whistleblower Protections page of the U.S. Dept. of Labor website so that he understands his rights. Also, he should consider secretly tape-recording his supervisor’s fever dreams at work as evidence, but be aware that every state has different laws regarding the need to notify the other party that they are being recorded. Finally, he should figure out to whom he’ll blow the whistle. A crusading journalist is always a good bet, but don’t stop there. He should consider informing influential people in his community (judge, pastor, police chief, etc.). He just has to make sure, though, that they’re not lizard people. — Mark
The post Do I Have to Speak Up if Someone Fails to Cash My Check? appeared first on New York Times.
