Susan Shapiro, once again a disguised name, had an undergraduate degree in Chemi
ID: 414858 • Letter: S
Question
Susan Shapiro, once again a disguised name, had an undergraduate degree in Chemistry from Smith College, a master’s degree in Chemical Engineering from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, three years’ service as a sergeant in the Israeli army, and an MBA from the University of Michigan. The following is a nearly ver- batim account of her experiences during the first month of employment with a large chemical company in New York: We spent about three weeks in New York City, being told about the structure of the company and the uses of the products, and then they took us down to Baton Rouge to look at a chemical plant. You realize that most of the MBAs who go to work for a chemical company have very little knowledge of chemistry. There were 28 of us who started in the training program that year, and the others generally had undergraduate degrees in engineer- ing or economics. I don’t know what you learn by looking at a chemical plant, but they flew us down South, put us up at a Holiday Inn, and took us on a tour of their plant the next day. As part of the tour, we were taken into a drying shed that had a roof but no walls, where an intermediate chemical product was being washed with benzene and then dried. The cake was dumped in a rotating screen and sprayed with benzene, which was then partially recovered by a vacuum box under the screen. However, the vacuum box technology is out of date now, and never did work very well. Much of the solvent evaporated inside the shed, and the atmosphere was heavy with the fumes, despite the “open air” type of construction. Benzene is a known carcinogen; there is a direct, statistically valid correlation between benzene and leukemia and birth defects. The federal standard is 10 parts per million, and a lab director would get upset if you let the concentration get near 100 parts for more than a few minutes, but in the drying shed it was over 1,000. The air was humid with the vapor, and the eyes of the men who were working in the area were watering. I was glad to get out, and we were only in the drying shed about three minutes. I told the foreman who was showing us around—he was a big, burly man with probably 30 years’ experience—that the conditions in the shed were dangerous to the health of the men working there, but he told me, “Lady, don’t worry about it. That is a sign-on-job (a job to which newly hired employees are assigned until they build up their seniority so that they can transfer to more desirable work). We’ve all done it, and it hasn’t hurt any of us.” That night, back at the motel, I went up to the director of personnel who was in charge of the training program and told him about the situation. He was more willing to listen than the foreman, but he said essentially the same thing: “Susan, you can’t change the ccompany in the first month. Wait awhile; understand the problems, but don’t be a trouble- maker right at the start.” The next morning everybody else flew back to New York City. I stayed in Baton Rouge and went to see the plant manager. I got to his office by 8:00, and explained to his secretary why I wanted to see him. He was already there, at work, and he came out to say that he was “up against it that morning” and had no time to meet with me. I said, “Fine, I’ll wait.” I did wait, until after lunchtime. Then he came up to me and said he didn’t want to keep tripping over me every time he went in and came out of his office, and if I would just go away for awhile, he would promise to see me between 4:30 and 5:00. It was 5:15 when he invited me to “come in and explain what has you so hot and both- ered.” I told him. He said that he certainly knew what I was talking about, and that every year he put a capital request into the budget to fix the problem, but that it always came back rejected—“probably by some MBA staff type” were his words—because the project could not now show an adequate return on investment, and because the present process was technically “open air” and therefore, not contrary to OSHA regulations. I started to explain that OSHA never seemed to know what it was doing—which is true, in my opinion—but he stopped me. He said he was leaving to pick up his family because his daughter was playing in a Little League baseball game at 6:30, and then they would have supper at McDonald’s. He said I could go along, if I didn’t mind sitting next to his five-year-old son, “who held the world’s record for the number of consecutive times he has spilled his milk in a restaurant.” He was a very decent man, working for a very indecent company. I told him I would go back to New York, and see what I could do. He did wish me “good luck,” but he also asked me not to get him personally involved because he thought that “insisting upon funding for a project that won’t meet targeted rates of return is a surefire way to be shown the door marked exit in large black letters.” “The senior people up there are going to tell you that it’s legal,” he continued, “and you know, unfortunately, they’re going to be right.” (Verbal statement of Susan Shapiro, a disguised name, to the case writer)
Class Assignment: What would you do in this situation? You can either continue the campaign to change the benzene drying process or not. If you decide to continue, prepare a presentation that you would make to the people that the Baton Rouge plant manager called “the senior executives up there who are going to tell you that it’s legal, and, unfortunately, they’re right.” If you decide to stop, be prepared to explain that decision to a close friend who believes strongly in environmental protection and workplace safety. Remember, your career in the company may be at stake. Can you make an effective presentation without being fired, or being placed in jobs where it is assumed you will eventually quit?
*This is a business ethics question, but that's not an option to choose from, so operations management was the next closest business subject.*
Explanation / Answer
Presentation:
I would directly support change in process to make it worker friendly, despite risk to my job.
Ladies & Gentleman we are a well know chemical industry and I am happy to be part of this organization. I have enjoyed my induction process and happy to get this opportunity
Overall I am really satisfied with the organization processes which are extremely up to date and follow all ethics and norms in our organization. All of us new recruits have been treated extremely well and were housed in a high budget hotel, you have left no stone unturned to make it a extremely memorable induction.
According to me, the strengths of the organization can be listed as follows:
I have highlighted the beautiful training imparted to 28 of us systematically and in great detail.
But I see an oppurtiunity for improvement which is as follows:
1. Benzene used in one of the processes of extremely high. I know it is for a temporary period and we adher to OSHA norms but I would recommend changes in process or improvising on the process as it could have long term implications leading to leukemia and birth defects.
I am sure the organization can plan cost effective safe method and I would be happy to be part of the process.
I hope my suggestion has been taken as an observation by a novice with a touch of humanity.
Related Questions
Navigate
Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.