Question 1 · Decision Making (DM)
MCQ
Common Description:
Mr. Singh lived in a sprawling housing society. He employed two part-time domestic helps, Vimla and Sharda.
Vimla was responsible for cleaning and dusting, while Sharda took care of cooking.
Once Sharda fell ill and consequently took leave for three days. When Sharda returned to work, she learned that Mr. Singh’s gold ring, a gift from his mother, was missing. Suspecting theft, Mr. Singh had terminated Vimla. Mr. Singh asked Sharda to take additional responsibility of cleaning the house, along with an offer to double her salary. Sharda accepted the offer as her previous two jobs were lost due to frequent health-related absences.
She was struggling to make ends meet; this offer would go a long way to help her.
Next day, while cleaning under the dressing table, Sharda found the gold ring. Overjoyed, Mr. Singh expressed his gratitude by presenting Sharda a reward of one thousand rupees! However, he made no mention of reinstating Vimla.
The news of the discovery of the lost ring eventually became public. The domestic helps in the society were chagrined by the treatment meted out to Vimla and the fact that the news of the discovery was not made public immediately. They wanted to ensure that they would not get targeted every time if something goes missing.
Which of the following policy options will BEST minimize the chance of employers suspecting their domestic workers of theft in the future?
- A.
The domestic workers will undergo a daily search by the security guards when leaving the society.
- B.
When a domestic worker is terminated on suspicion of theft without proof, they will have to be paid at least one month’s salary in full.
- C.
The current address and contact details of all domestic workers should be submitted to the housing society.
- D.
If there is a suspicion of theft, the security guards will rst conduct a thorough search of the affected house.
- E.
When a domestic worker is terminated on suspicion of theft, the employer will have to publicly apologize if the domestic worker can prove their innocence.
Step-by-Step Solution
Key idea: Deterrence theory and power asymmetry in informal settings.
Step 1: The goal is to minimize baseless suspicion by employers. Because employers hold disproportionate power, policies must impose a tangible cost on them for acting without proof.
Step 2: Evaluate the deterrent effect of each option:
- Option A (Daily search) inconveniences workers but does not deter employers from suspecting them.
- Option B (Financial penalty for baseless termination) imposes a direct economic cost on the employer for acting on mere suspicion. This forces them to investigate thoroughly before firing.
- Option C (Address submission) is administrative and does not change employer behaviour.
- Option D (Guard search) shifts the investigation burden but does not penalise the employer for false suspicion.
- Option E (Public apology) is a social deterrent, but in informal sectors, financial loss (Option B) is a much stronger and more immediate behavioural modifier.
Step 3: Option B creates the strongest systemic deterrent against baseless accusations.
Answer: B
Question 2 · Decision Making (DM)
MCQ
Common Description:
Mr. Singh lived in a sprawling housing society. He employed two part-time domestic helps, Vimla and Sharda.
Vimla was responsible for cleaning and dusting, while Sharda took care of cooking.
Once Sharda fell ill and consequently took leave for three days. When Sharda returned to work, she learned that Mr. Singh’s gold ring, a gift from his mother, was missing. Suspecting theft, Mr. Singh had terminated Vimla. Mr. Singh asked Sharda to take additional responsibility of cleaning the house, along with an offer to double her salary. Sharda accepted the offer as her previous two jobs were lost due to frequent health-related absences.
She was struggling to make ends meet; this offer would go a long way to help her.
Next day, while cleaning under the dressing table, Sharda found the gold ring. Overjoyed, Mr. Singh expressed his gratitude by presenting Sharda a reward of one thousand rupees! However, he made no mention of reinstating Vimla.
Sharda was contemplating whether she should inform Vimla that she found Mr. Singh’s ring.
Which of the following considerations will BEST dissuade Sharda in sharing the information about the ring with Vimla?
- A.
Mr. Singh will probably terminate Sharda if he gets to know that she has revealed this information.
- B.
Had Vimla done her job properly, she would have found the ring and avoided this incident.
- C.
Vimla already knows she has not stolen anything, so telling her will not give her any new information.
- D.
Sharda is not keeping well, and Mr. Singh warned her that her frequent absences could lead to her termination.
- E.
Whenever Sharda was absent, Vimla used to help her by taking over her responsibilities.
Step-by-Step Solution
Key idea: Stakeholder vulnerability and self-preservation in ethical dilemmas.
Step 1: Sharda is in a highly vulnerable position. She needs the doubled salary to survive and has already been warned about her health-related absences.
Step 2: Evaluate the practical risks of her sharing the information:
- Option A: If Mr. Singh finds out Sharda revealed his private discovery, he will likely fire her. Given her financial desperation and precarious standing, losing this job is a catastrophic personal risk. This is the strongest practical dissuader.
- Option B: This is victim-blaming and does not practically stop Sharda from acting on her moral conscience.
- Option C: While logically true that Vimla knows her own innocence, it ignores the fact that Vimla needs proof to clear her name. It is a weak dissuader.
- Option D: This highlights her vulnerability but does not directly link the act of telling Vimla to her termination as strongly as Option A does.
- Option E: This is a reason TO tell Vimla (reciprocity), not a dissuader.
Step 3: The severe risk of retaliation and job loss (Option A) is the most compelling reason for a vulnerable employee to remain silent.
Answer: A
Question 3 · Decision Making (DM)
MCQ
Common Description:
Moonlighting is the practice of working for one organisation while also accepting additional responsibilities and jobs, typically without the employer's knowledge in another organization. It is named as such because it is typically performed at night or on the weekends. “Doing two remote jobs at once was already happening; it was the biggest open secret out there in tech," said a US techie.
Due to weaker margins, major Indian IT companies such as Infosys, TCS, and Wipro announced that they would delay, postpone, or reduce variable pay-outs to employees for the rst quarter of scal year 2023. This drew attention to Moonlighting. The Indian IT industry was divided on the issue of Moonlighting. Some considered it unethical, while others viewed it as an urgent necessity. Infozeta Chairman Patrick's stance on this matter was crystal clear."There is a great deal of talk about people working part-time in the tech industry. This is cheating, pure and simple," he had tweeted.
However, McMillan, CEO of Betauniverse, does not consider Moonlighting as"cheating."."Employment is a contract between an employer who pays me for working'n' number of hours per day," he explained. “Now, what I do after that time is entirely up to me; I can do whatever I please."
Mr. Q is an IT professional who works for a small company in Bangalore. His o ce hours are from 2:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.; thus, he wants to utilize his morning time. He thought of taking up extra work; however, he is not sure about the righteousness of his decision. His company does not have any clear policy on Moonlighting. As he is confused, he seeks opinions of the people who work in his industry to understand ethical dimension of Moonlighting. The following opinions are shared with Mr. Q:
Opinion 1: Moonlighting is unacceptable since the employer has a complete right over the employee.
Opinion 2: Moonlighting is a choice of the employee, and that the employer has no authority over the employee's conduct after o ce hours.
Opinion 3: Moonlighting leads to employee missing out on important organizational work.
Opinion 4: While Moonlighting, the employee might unknowingly leak critical information gained from one organization to the other.
Opinion 5: It is OK to Moonlight as employers are exploitative and underpay employees.
Given the abovementioned opinions, which of the following combinations will BEST help Mr. Q to realize that Moonlighting is unethical?
- A.
Opinions 2& 4
- B.
Opinions 3& 4
- C.
Opinions 1& 5
- D.
Opinions 2& 3
- E.
Opinions 2& 5
Step-by-Step Solution
Key idea: Identifying valid ethical arguments versus extreme or permissive statements.
Step 1: We need opinions that highlight the ethical breaches of moonlighting, such as harm to the employer or conflict of interest.
Step 2: Evaluate each opinion:
- Opinion 1: Claims the employer has "complete right" over the employee. This is an extreme, legally false premise and a weak ethical argument.
- Opinion 2: Supports moonlighting as a personal choice. (Pro-moonlighting).
- Opinion 3: Highlights that moonlighting leads to missing important organizational work. This points to a breach of duty and neglect, a strong ethical argument against it.
- Opinion 4: Highlights the risk of leaking critical information. This points to a conflict of interest and breach of confidentiality, another strong ethical argument.
- Opinion 5: Justifies moonlighting due to exploitative employers. (Pro-moonlighting).
Step 3: Opinions 3 and 4 provide concrete, valid ethical reasons why moonlighting is problematic.
Answer: B