Assignment #3 question:
Analyze “Case Study: Confronting Harassment” by John Hasnas in terms of thefollowing questions. A good answer will attend to the relevant details of the case.
To what extent is the behaviour and viewpoint of Dominique Francon justifiable? To what extent is the behaviour and viewpoint of Ellsworth Toohey defensible?
What alternatives are now open to Howard Roark? What considerations are relevant to his decision? What should he do?
Suppose that Dominique does file suit against Toohey and the magazine, and you are her attorney? Based on the facts about U.S. sexual harassment law in the article by Bravo and Cassedy, how would you argue her case? Suppose you are the defence attorney for Toohey and the magazine? How would you argue their case? Which side is strongest? (Unit 10)
The only resources you must go through are:
1:Bravo, Ellen, and Ellen Cassedy (1995), “Sexual Harassment in the Workplace,” from Business Ethics: Readings and Cases in Corporate Morality, 3rd ed., ed. W. Michael Hoffman and Robert Frederick. New York: McGraw-Hill, p.326-340.
2:Hasnas, John (1996), “Case: Confronting Harassment,” from Ethical Issues in Business: A Philosophical Approach, 5th ed., ed. Thomas Donaldson and Patricia Werhane. New York: Prentice-Hall, p.402-407.