Electronic Surveillance Invasion Of Privacy Philosophy Essay

Electronic Surveillance Invasion Of Privacy Philosophy Essay Electronic surveillance has become part of our everyday life for quite some time by now. When we make a call to most service companies or organizations, we almost always hear the computer voice: Forreason, this phone call is monitored. When we go to work, turn on the computer, it says on the screen: your activity is monitored. Everywhere we look, we found surveillance cameras, on the street, in the mall, at school We found them in the United States as well as most of the other countries in the whole world. Over ABC news, one day I heard about the humming bird the US military was developing to help the troops in the field. It is remote controlled, looks and flies like a humming bird, with a camera on it. Ive never been too worried about the privacy issue until I see this little bird flying around. Its so small, it has the ability to go basically everywhere. If its used in the military, who can say its never going to be used by general public? If everybody can buy one, is it possible for somebody to buy one as a toy and fly it around the park? Or how about a kid flying it around the apartment building or the neighborhood? Will we need to get rid of all the windows of our houses to have some privacy? The news keep reporting a lot of cases in which the criminals were caught because of the use of electronic surveillance. Whenever this happens, most people might think its really a good thing. It is definitely good if video cameras only catch bad guys, but thats never going to be possible, it either catchs everything or nothing at all. Watching the crimes being committed on a video would sure brings definite evidences the same as hearing the criminals talk about their crimes on the phone. In court, electronic surveillance has been very successful. But as communications advance, the surveillance techniques has became more and more intrusive to privacy. One has to agree that electronic surveillance does play an important role in criminal investigation in this information era, but we also cant deny the fact that its very intrusive and its even becoming more and more intrusive because of the advancing technology. Ethical dilemma Now, weve reached a ethical dilemma here. First of all, electronic surveillance is helpful in law enforcement. Definitely no doubt at all. In fact, law enforcement agents requests lots and lots of information from all sorts of organizations, from wiretaps, surveillance cameras, to cell phone locations and e-mails. The most familiar one we all know is whenever there is car stolen, robbery broken in, or anything, surveillance cameras films are pulled out to the light to identify criminals. Some of the things we might not know as much: in 2006 alone, AOL received about one thousand request from the law enforcement on a monthly basis; in 2009, the website Face book received more than ten request daily; some cell phone companies even have websites, so the police can use the data from it freely. Overall, thousands of electronic surveillance are ordered every year by the law enforcement. Or we might even say, for solving almost every crime, there is some type of electronic surveillance used . On the other hand, privacy concern is getting more and more of an issue. When the very early type of surveillance was used, like wiretaps, they are only conducted on people who are suspected of some sort of crime, not on regular legitimately behaved citizens. But after surveillance cameras came into play, everything, everybody is monitored, legitimate or not, guilty or not, people are all watched all the time in work place, on the street or most public places. Luckily, we still have our privacy left in our own home if we want. But if later on, the little humming bird come into life, we might as well lose that, by then, there would be barely any privacy left if any at all. Then what shall we do as a society? Should we keep current surveillance, or even add lots more to make the world a safer place to live? Or should we get rid of all the surveillance, and all the advance technology and go back to what we had during the very early days? Or do we want to use the surveillance and at the same time protect privacy as much as possible? How do we approach that? Analyzing by the use of ethical theories Kant First of all, lets see what Kant would say about this situation. Kants Categorical Imperative (First Formula) says: to act only from the moral rules that you can at the same time will to be universal moral laws. We might put the moral rule this way: it is okay for the law enforcement to use electronic surveillance. Now, in order to evaluate this morale rule, we try to put it into a universal rule. Law enforcement can use electronic surveillance whenever they want. Since surveillance works very well, if the court accepts any evidence from electronic surveillance, and law enforcement is allowed to put surveillance over anybody at any place any time, we might find surveillance cameras everywhere, maybe even in our bedrooms or bathrooms. Thus, by then, people would have no expect about privacy anymore. Under such circumstances, people who want to conduct criminal activities wont be doing it under public light, or anywhere that electronic surveillance can reach, they might be doing it in underground tunnels or under the water, or they might invent some type of shield or clothes such that the cameras wont go through, or whatever way thats possible. Of course they wont be using phone calls, or e-mails or any other electronic communication methods. They might be using pigeons or bugs or whatever works to send messages. So, by then, all the surveillance we have wont be useful any more, thus the idea that surveillance will help fight crimes, catch criminals wont be true any more. So we conclude it would reach contradictory when we try to universal the rule. Then, Kants Second Formulation of Categorical Imperative points out it is wrong for one person to use another person. When the law enforcement use wiretap on a suspect, Kant would probably say its okay. But for the cases of surveillance cameras and other surveillance which targets all the people in general, the law enforcement are using the legitimate people trying to find out who the criminals are. Those people who are lawful citizens should not be treated as means to an end. So it is wrong for law enforcement to watch over everybody trying to find the bad guys. Act Utilitarian Act utilitarian uses the Principle of Utility to just moral issues, it believes an action is right if it increases the total happiness of all the affected parties, and an action is wrong if it decreases the total happiness of the affected parties. Lets say law enforcement is using surveillance cameras in neighborhood parks in order to detect possible criminal activities. Now, lets try to determine all the affected parties and the change of their happiness. First of all, the camera is there to watch over the park, so the police department dont need as many patrols out there, that would save them some money. Also, cameras are on twenty-four hours a day, and it shows absolute evidence, people can watch it, replay it, it most likely will even work better than if a patrol is there in person. The camera might help to keep the criminals away, make it a better neighborhood to live in, thus everybody in the neighborhood will benefit. On the other hand, people who lives around the park, maybe going there quite a few times a day, and dont feel like being watched all the time, so they might chose not to go to the park at all. Especially, people who live right by the park might worry the cameras could possibly see what theyre doing in thei r house, that might cause them great discomfort. They might even move away from the park to free themselves. In this case we need to decide which side weights more, if there is barely anybody living around the park, and there are a lot of criminal activities going on over there, utilitarianism might say its better to have some surveillance cameras there. But for the places where many people live around with very rarely any criminal activities happen, it might not be such a good idea to put surveillance cameras there. The only problems here is, most likely, where there are more people, there are more crimes happening. Rational people would agree not much crimes are happening deep in the forest. So the issue becomes, the places where surveillance cameras are most in need are places where there are more people, but at the same time, thats the place where we would appreciate not having the cameras. Rule Utilitarian Rule utilitarianism holds that we should use those moral rules which, if followed by everyone, will lead to the greatest increase in total happiness. Now lets look at the same universal moral rule as we used for Kant: Law enforcement can use electronic surveillance whenever they want. If law enforcement can use whatever surveillance they want and it holds up in court, they would not hesitate to use it, since that would make them break into the criminal cases way easier. Thus we might came upon such scenario: everybody is required to wear a cap with a camera on it, or a pair of earrings with tiny cameras on the bottom, so the law enforcement can watch over all our activities, thus nothing will go hidden, no criminal activities will go without being find out. Then we will be living in an absolute transparent world. How about if the technology advance so much, people might invent something that could tell if people are thinking evil, if such detection chip is planted in everyones head, then, surely, there wouldnt be any crimes happening at all. If there is no crimes on the world, all the legitimate citizens would definitely benefit. Also, if there is no crimes, we probably dont even need the entire justice branch of the country, or any attorneys, or weapons or such, thats going to be a great big save. If there is no crime, everybody will have lot less to worry about everyday, it should be way easier for people to stay happy. The first negative consequence of such an universal adoption of electronic surveillance is that its going to cost the taxpayers a lot of money to have all the cameras installed, all the special software or device designed and produced to put into use. Also, a lot of law enforcement personals would be needed to monitor all these many people in the country. Whats the ratio of law enforcement to citizen? One to five? Ten? Thats a question. The most harmful consequence of massive electronic surveillance would be the unhappiness caused to people by having very little privacy. Were born to love freedom, nobody love to be watched all the time. If people are not happy living in this country, theyll go somewhere else where freedom and privacy is valued more. Thus, US as a nation, will be downgraded, less and less people will want to come and work here, our own best elites will definitely seek opportunities elsewhere, the whole country and everyone inside would be worse off. In conclusion, the possible harm caused by adopting the universal moral rule seems to exceed the possible benefits. So the rule utilitarianism would probably say using electronic surveillance for law enforcement is wrong. Social Contract Theory Social contract theory states that it is morally right for one person to act according to a moral rule that is accepted by rational people because of the mutual benefits of adopting such a rule, given others follow the rules as well. To apply social contract theory, we identify the rational agents and their rights. The morality of the action of the law enforcement depends on whether the privacy rights of the people is violated. Most of us would agree having privacy is one way the society gives to rational adults on the account that they will be responsible for whatever they do. We dont give much privacy to babies or toddlers, because mostly they dont know what they are doing, and they need somebody to watch over them, also we generally dont hold them responsible for what they do. We as adults, take care of them, and are responsible for their behaviors. If were being watched over like babies, would that imply we dont know what were doing, and need some supervision all the time? If thats the case, how can the law enforcement know what they are doing, on what ground can they have the right and ability to watch our the rest of the world? Should they themselves be watched over at the same time? On the other hand, if were treated like babies, we shouldnt be responsible for what we do. Some might argue we dont have rights to privacy the same way as we have right to life and to our own property. But we mostly would agree, giving people some privacy have many benefits. Privacy gives people the opportunity to do what they please, to be themselves, to grow in their own unique way. Generally speaking, people expect privacy when they are in their private places, such as bedrooms; people expect certain things to be private such as how much money they have in the bank; or what they said to their girlfriend or boyfriend or such. Privacy is valued in our society, a rational people would agree, having some privacy is good to everybody because nobody wants to live under a camera and have other people watch how many times they went to bathrooms or even how many scars are over their bodies. In conclusion, according to social contract theory, it is wrong for law enforcement to use electronic surveillance because it violates the privacy of the general public. Consequences if electronic surveillance is not allowed Now, look at the other side of the issue. What would happen if electronic surveillance is not allowed at all? Of course we would have our privacy back, people will be living a happier life being able to do what they please without being watched. But what about law enforcement? Will we be able to capture any criminals? Were better off than our ancestors in many ways, such as, we have better clothes, better food, better education and so on. But the world is also getting more and more dangerous, all the newest technology, the advance in education also made it possible for some criminals to do huge damage to the society. If electronic surveillance arent allowed in court, will we be able to catch those people and put them in jail? The chances might be very low. If criminals figure out the law enforcement cant reach them, most likely theyll do a lot more damage, if people know they cant be caught for the bad things they do, most likely theyll keep doing it, and other people who use to be legitimate person might even find out stealing from other people is way easier than working hard to gain something, if lots of other people are doing it, why cant they? Computers are used by almost everybody here in US, people conduct crimes on co mputers, some might sell illegal things on the web, some might sent viruses to destroy other peoples computer, all sorts of bad things could happen, thus it is becoming increasing important that the law enforcement can stay on top of the technology and keep the criminal activities under control. If there are all legitimate people on the world, then we sure dont need any surveillance, we can have all our privacy. But thats not the case, then, some type of surveillance will be needed to watch over those who are trying to damage the society. Decision and Implementation From the point of view of Kant, act utilitarianism, rule utilitarianism, and social contract theory, we have all concluded it is wrong for the law enforcement to use electronic surveillance for law enforcement. But on the other hand, because of the advancing in technology and education, criminals these days are becoming very good at covering what they do, so surveillance is needed in lots of ways to protect the general public from the harm the criminals might cause, and it is important for law enforcement to have some electronic surveillance, so they can effectively catch those criminals and give the punish they deserve, thus people will be living in a much more safer environment. Now we realize we all want as much privacy as possible, but we also want to live in a safe place where criminals are punished for the bad things they do, thus electronic surveillance becomes something we dont like, but we got to have some. That happens a lot in life, suppose somebody might dont like vegetables at all, but because of the benefits vegetable brings, they have to eat some, since they all want to live a healthy and long life. But at the same time, they might be able to find all sorts of ways to make the vegetables tastier to their desire, so they will more likely want to eat it, even possibly enjoy eating it. Now how should we implement such theory on electronic surveillance? How can we use it in such a way that brings more beneficiary than damage? Congress has already passed many laws relating to protecting peoples privacy, such as the Video Privacy Protection Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act, and so on, but the technology is advancing so rapidly, which makes it hard for the congress to react and come up with new law regarding new issues. So, first of all, we will need a group of elites who possess the newest technology in the legislative group, so they will be able to come up with supportive laws as fast as needed. This way the gap between new technology and the laws will be luckily filled up. On the other hand, its a good idea to use every possible way to actively promote virtues in people in the country, higher education is one way to pursue this, high education will bring people up to some level of understanding about how the society function as a whole, how is it important that everybody in the whole nation, whole world need to work together to make the universe a better place to live in. Other than that, good economy, good living condition, good relationship between family members and relatives and friends, all those together will give people a sense of belonging, make people happier and such that not as many people will be thinking about committing crimes, which then leads to less surveillance needed, so in return well all have more privacy. Also, another very important part is how can we make sure our law enforcement personals are well trained about how important it is to stick to their code of professional ethics, such that people can trust them not to misuse priva te information, and there should be strict laws to regulate when such things does happen. If legitimate person can trust law enforcement to only use their information for specific reasons, they would be more willing to provide such information and give away some of their privacy.

Reward of motivating good employees

Reward of motivating good employees Executive Summary The report highlight good reward Motivating employees at the workplace has become a challenge for employers today. Profit sharing, Scanlon plan, Annual Bonus, Gain sharing and Merit plane these are employee incentive plan. With this in view, recommendations are made towards developing and implementing reward polices for employees in the different departments of the firm or company, Performance of management is also discussed as a way to enhance productivity. Incentive is good as well wrong decision for employees. In this summary I have define that incentive is most important for employees but on merit base. If any staff member working honestly and just for that company than company have a right to pay him incentive in the shape of bonuses. The total report is on manager and personal ideas about employees motivation. Does it is favourable or against off workers. If against why or if is it favourable than give related example, below of this report I have explain about each plan as well example of motivation. The challenge for management is to perform action new policies by means of endorsement and requirement plan provided at the end of this report. Introduction In this summary I have explain about motivation how employer motivate to workers and get extra work. In short term motivation mean any type of financial reward pay to employees, staff or worker whose production go beyond limits some arrange in advance level of quality. In motivation many factors have been identifying to influence employee attempt at their place of work and group. As well there are best size in consider method and series of action of motivation in organisations. These are the following factors that I am watching to examine. I believe to learn what motivation is about in complete self interest needs one to be motivated inevitably. Motivation in organisations is crucial for employees or workers. Many factors have been identifying to affect employee effort at their place of the work and organisations also there has been a great size in recognized acting technique and processes of motivation in firm. This type of areas which I shall be looking to examine. I believe learni ng what motivation is about in its self interest one to be incentive inevitably motivation in firm is vital for employees. Number of plan has been recognised to effect workers efforts at their place of work and organisation. I could also easily say this is better identifying method and process of incentive in organization. There are following plans which I shall look to analysis. I believe to learn about motivation thus give incentive to employees is better option for organization. As well analyse about inevitably motivation in organization play a vital role for employee. Motivation Theory There are too many theories which have been create to struggle to explain the concept of motivation these theory help to understand employees response in certain situation at work one or other to improve their regular payment reduce their effort. These types of theory help to understand which way motivate to workers in difference organization as well how best way used the movement of incentive to different types of individual. These theories see into workers or peoples, wants, needs and desire and what amount of needs have to achieve the give task or goal. Example: According to the research of CIPD most of the firms which are underdeveloped to communicate with their staff have seen motivation decrease during the time of recession. Example: According to the ‘Farren he speak about 12 human needs which is as follow education, shelter, family, wealth, work, community, mobility, safety, socialising, spiritually thats all human need I believe that all human needs reach or faced by reward, we can get it easily if these factor put in at our place of work and company. Personal ideas on motivation My ideas about motivation is to increase the ability of individual, increase level of skill, as well better way of time knowledge that how to complete task work alongside incentive. I can also tell that personally the ultimate reward is special advantages of motivation in term of money; as well employee has the knowledge about particular task which he has done on time. Employee Stock Ownership Plan (ESOP) Employee stock ownership plans is totally companywide plans, in this plan company offer opinion share of its own stock. In this plan cash going to be used for bought such stock as a trust successful to buy shares of the firms stock for workers. In this situation company makes that contribution annually in part of whole to total workers compensation. ESOP plans are mostly used to provide market share of the set off owners successfully and very nearly held in t he companies, to motivate and reward of the workers. In short ESOP is not an employees purchase it is contribute of employees. Some of the companys makes formal preparation for the workers participation is is called employee stock ownership planed. In employees ownership employee can purchase any kind of stock directly, which is given it in bonus shape, or he can get a stock option as well be established through a profit sharing plan. Some of the employees they become an owner of the firm because of workers corporate in this situation everyone have an equal right. Example: The ESOP ASSOCIATION CANADA (Employee Share Ownership Plan) is a non-profit set up institution in November 1990 for the purpose of advance the concept of employee ownership for business in Canada. Employee ownership is an important advice for doing work for economic growth and reorganization business drawing new projects. ( ESOP Association Canada). Example: In 1974, almost 11000 companies have these types of plans with the help of this help they cover up to 13 million employees. According to my ideas these types of plans couldnt used in partnership an especially in most professional local governing authority. ESOP plans only used in S corporation. In this situation private companies they must be repurchase share of change workers. I am as well favourable of ESOP plans can increase their local authority performance if workers can participate in decision which is effecting on work. Profit Sharing Plan It is better way to give incentive company workers profit sharing is most beneficial for both company as well for employees. In this situation both company and staff play a role as win. Profit sharing such commonly used for share profit programme that used for the company productivity as well stock reward to workers. In profit sharing plan all or most workers receive share of the firms annual profit is most popular today. We could easily said in this plan profit are divided between company and workers. Each worker gets percentage of that profit which is based on company earning or company revenue. In profit sharing manager play a very vital role for employees. Because they paid money to employees just for check or related to the output. Management provide or motivate management benefit received attempt. In this situation incentive are paying to employees just related of output and to the scope to which he shares in the rise value of stock that he produces. Example: Ford motor company introduce a profit sharing plan for salaried workers. And General Motors increased its profit sharing payout when profit was improved or increase. Its mean each company pay profit sharing reward to his workers when they get extra profit. This incentive in the shape of company shares. (Dessler, 2005) According to my ideas these type of programme are planned to benefit of employees for the firm increasing its earning or income. In profit sharing or these type planned designed because of bonuses paying to employees, in this situation check before pay hence the performance of company is better in the given time period, month, annual and compared to the current or present year. Profit sharing programme immediate provides to workers and reward paying benefit as well. Example: According to the ‘Dar El profit sharing is an effective incentive, which have added benefit of being a need that is usually never meet condition. With some relating to the law reward system serves to give something support the motivational process which is employee working smarter. (Dar El, 1991) Example: One of the biggest basic structures of the appreciation is to treat workers as they are employers of the company. Thats act of future responsibility to the specific person.(Bob Nelson, 1997) Annual Bonus Plan Annual bonuses mean bonus which is paid end of the year. Such bonus are paid to worker behalf of his work performance or time which is up to one year. In this situation employees only allowed to take 9 days leave in each year. Many firms have annual bonus plans aim to motivating the very short term performance of managers and senior managers mean executive level. Example: According to the BBC news they advertise recently network rail chief executive is to give up his annual bonus for this year saying he does not want it to could discussion of the firms performance. (BBC, 14 May 2009) Example: Displeasure is supporting device over a new bonus scheme at Tesco that will reward chief executive Sir Terry Leahy with a  £11.5m windfall if the supermarket groups US venture Fresh Easy succeeds.(the independent business). Example: My ideas but other members of the Network Rail executive committee are still being considered for payments which could total hundreds of thousands of pounds. Example: The news that holiday bonuses are not so traditional anymore comes in a global survey by HR services firm ‘Hewitt Associates. Example: Up to 207,000 staff at Tesco is shovel share bonuses worth a total of  £98m after the retailers record annual results, it was exposing today. Tesco managers said all staff from checkout employees to store managers which have worked with the supermarket for at least a year by the end of February is valid for the free shares contributes 3.6 per cent of salary, up to a maximum of  £3,000. Gain sharing plan The best system of high level management in which organization search high level of performance through the concern and participation of his workers or employees. As improve in performance and in the profit employees share financially. Gain sharing plans is an motivation plan which engage all workers or staff in a very common struggle to get a organization productivity based on bias. ( Garry Dessler, 2005) In this reward we could said company achieve maintenance in addition key measure performance. That type of reward are payee for increase in performance improvement. Gain sharing reward is increase the feelings of employers as well accountability. Gain sharing motivation feeling of superiority, as well most positive attitude or work towards company. Example: According to my idea gain sharing reward are paid to the performance of team performance not for the performance of individuals. Raise the level of company problems from everyone has a more financial stake for the company success. In gain sharing management require a participative management style which is most stress for each organization. Pay for performance Pay for performance is the best sources of help to date on the issues of whether these concepts work how they can be practical most effectively in the workplace. This important volume looks at pay practice. Performance pay refers to the process of analyse workers amend this is based on bonuses and wages, salary in this situation manager can determine that how much better number of employees performance on work. In simply performance pay make sense to incentive more production of employees for their rise in contribution to the company. EXAMPLE: The best example of performance pay is NHS, AGENDA for CHANGE has successful make something easier pay system of parts for the NHS with the intention of enabling greater able to adapt to new situation and addressing incessant equal pay to failure match. (NHS Executive, 1999) EXAMPLE: According to the civil services, existing performance related (PRP) secret plot have been reviewed and performance as well Makinson report (2000) has suggest a shift to team bonuses which will also be part of chain into target ability. Example: In Education health teacher were integrate on to new scale form performance small in quantity in (1999) and pay review body endorsement that classroom teacher should be included in this scheme (93 percent) were successful in achieving awards. Which in perfect form were pay award linked to performance and talent. Example: According to the Cabinet continuities from the previous period of market based reform are notable with responsibility to long pay with performance maintain and indeed, intensified. (Cabinet Office, 1999) Example: At the very first comprehensive spending review progressed through 1999, the chancellor announced higher than expected general settlement for health and for education, but press sure on pay was maintain now money was tied definite to funding capital projects, such as improve in information technology. Such as hospital waiting lists. Example: Market manipulation by the Prime Minister made it clear that Government did not expect to see pay levels increasing at the same rate as general money spent unless they were linked to result. (Peston and Timmins 1999). FINANCIAL REWARD The organization needs to be recognized requirement and maintain paying policies, method and practices that are reliable with and support effective risk management. There have to be link between response and reward and the incentive system needs to reflect this. I could easily explain financial reward with the help of my ideas this against or favourable of employee as well for organization. There are number of incentive system that a firm could use to motivate its employee. Wages and salary Portion or services rate Benefit of faction Merit pay Share owner WAGES AND SALRY Wages and salary is simply paying for staff performance. Mean work of employee and given reward such as a wages and salary. We could easily said simply used for business. Staff may modern existence paid the same as a fellow workers who they seem to yourself is not so productive. PORTION OR SERVICE PAY Portion or services pay such pay paying to worker on each item which they produce in set period of time. That type of payment paying to staff for the behalf of work which they did in couple of time. We could easily said with the help of services pay increase speed of work so thats why increase in productivity. Example: According to my ideas or opinion if services paying to worker they do not cluster together on quality of work as important on speed of work. As well for portion pay worker or staff they ignore the rule of company such as, health and safety. Because they trying to increase output just for portion payment. BENEFIT OF FACTION These type of financial reward mostly paid to workers such as extra their normal wages or salary. Benefit of faction paying to staff for extra ordinary work. These type of reward mostly pay to all level of managers. Such as car, free food, house, private health insurance, medical treatments etc. Example: According to my ideas these type of benefits going against and favour of company. Such help to worker and provide human and social needs. Encourage employee because he can stay or work more and better for company. And i am against because of common use to a majority of employees will increase cost able to cut or pointed. SHARE OWNERSHIP PLAN This is also financial reward for employee these type of incentive paying to senior or middle level managers who are given able to give share in company, on contrary than accurate membership of a profit sharing scheme. Example: According to my point of view if share are paying to worker they will work harder as they have share in company if company is running on profit this is also beneficial for workers. In this case worker they dont like to leave the company. As well I am against of share ownership because of this other staff in panic mean these type of benefit just paying to senior Non Financial Reward Non financial reward mean range in which money is motivator to increase performance corpse piece of an unresolved argument. Information technology held that all staff likely to over reported significance of pay in any employee critical inspection. Non financial reward inspection sign display the failure to match between people point of view what they have to be said and did with respect to pay and concluded that although pay is not same important in all individuals, we could easily said such an important general motivator that many mangers make too below estimate its importance. (Tim claydon, 2007) There are following non financial reward which is below of this line. Four weeks or monthly annual leaves Flexible benefits cash sum Flexible working as meets the needs of the business. Share save schemes Contributory pension scheme Discounted/preferential rates on a whole range of products from loans to mortgages Abraham Maslow Non Cash Incentive RECOMENDATION AND IDEAS In each point of my topic I have already give my ideas. In both condition I have represent why incentive is important and why not for organization. I have some more words to say that all combination of my whole topic which I am going to give my ideas this incentive is necessary for employee if yes so I have to explain about this. According to my point of view employee must believe producing performance I could easily said this is certain specified behaviour which have to lead known reward. The employees of the organization they must have believed that reward offered are interesting. Some employees they want edging benefit, such as pension, house rent allowances as well medical allowances because they are old workers and they want retirement security. But some employees they desire promotions because they are looking for power. Employees they must trust a set of level in individual efforts which will lead to achieve the local governing authority standard of performance. CONCLUSION The total rewards strategy for the organization will speak distinctly the overall plan for the rewards that will be offered to the employees in swap for excellent work and responsibility from them. That type of strategy is full set of rewards, both financial and non-financial, and will also develop plan which focus on performance of management. This doesnt mean that incentive at work places does not better actually according to my personal experience I proffered that it is crucial to get the best out of employees. Managers just have to find the best suitable processes to apply to the exceptional organization. REFERNCE AND BIBLOGRAPHY Julie Beardwell Tim Claydon (2007). Human Resource Management. 5th ed. london: FT Prentice Hall. 499. Dar-El, E. (1991, November 22). The productivity option. Nelson, B. (1997). 1001 ways to reward employees. Gary dessler (2005). Human resources managment. 10th ed. London: Pearson. 453. Dressler (2005). Human resources management. 10th edition. London: Pearson. Page no 455. Newspaper sources http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8049226.stm Internet sources http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/tesco-investors-attack-executive-bonus-plan-455331.html?cmp=ilc-n http://www.esop-canada.com/

Universality and the Particular Essay -- Poetry Literature Authors Wri

Universality and the Particular â€Å"History,† Gilman writes, â€Å"is, or should be, the story of our racial life† (Gilman 216). Eliot is a bit less succinct, but perhaps he could be most pithily summed up as saying: â€Å"The business of the poet is not to find new emotions, but to use the ordinary ones and, in working them up into poetry, to express feelings which are not in actual emotions at all† (Eliot 1919, 23). It is not immediately evident what either author means by these statements, however, they both contain the core of the argument. Both authors have their individual aims and intents with their writings, however, in spite of the differences, their arguments find more common ground than disagreement. Their terminology is certainly different, but they see the purpose and aims of literature as by and large the same. Literature, according to Gilman, originated as the â€Å"legitimate child of oral tradition, a product of natural brain activity† (218). Implicit in this, and made explicit elsewhere, is that literature is inherently a form of communication. And, â€Å"since our very life depends on some communication,† Gilman indicates very strongly that literature, both in its ancestry and in its current incarnation, provides an extremely important role in our existence† (218). She elaborates on this notion of communication, however, and specifies that a â€Å"passionate interest in other people’s lives†¦is the most vital art† (218). To her, the expression of the â€Å"great field of human life† is the task of all literature and is crucial to the very existence of society (218). We can presume that there is some bias in her argument, as people tend to think highly of their chosen craft. The essential element, however, is Gilman’s focus on t h... ...e essentially expansionist, forcing the borders outwards to include women in literature. Eliot, on the other hand, seems to be moving inward and examining and rejecting a certain type of reader, a certain type of poet. However, both, ultimately see literature as capturing the entirety of the human existence. The mechanism for doing so in their arguments differ greatly, but the intent and the final goals are the same. Where one speaks of the human soul, the other speaks of impersonality and mean the same thing. Works Cited Eliot, T.S. â€Å"The Impersonality of Poetry.† Issues in Contemporary Critical Theory: A Casebook. Ed. Peter Barry. London: Macmillan, 1987. 23. Eliot, T.S. â€Å"Hamlet and His Problems.† Hamlet. Ed. Cyrus Hoy. New York: W.W. Norton, 1963. 180-184. Gilman, Charlotte Perkins. The Yellow Wallpaper and Other Writings. New York: Bantam, 1989.

College Should Not be a Playground :: College Admissions Essays

College Should Not be a Playground University students today have it pretty good. At decent-sized schools, students have access to any number of low-cost services that civilians would donate organs for. We get gyms and fitness centers for free or close to it. We have computer labs, lounges and more clubs and societies arriving every semester. With little or no fees, on-campus coffee bars and pick-up basketball games make traveling into the real world increasingly ludicrous. Sure, we pay more in tuition rates to help off set the cost, but college students these days shouldn't sweat the bill's bundled-in activity fees - it's simply worth it to fork over a little extra cash for the added convenience. Besides, with college rates continually on the rise, these resource charges amount to a drop in a very large bucket. On the other hand, shouldn't a University provide for its students without bleeding them dry? After all, without the learners, the educators and administrators would be jobless. So why should students pay for access to increasingly basic and common services? Students have come to expect these tasty perks, as if our Universities owe us for passing through their hallowed halls. But have we come to expect too much? Do we truly deserve extravagant bonuses? My own school has for years given students free, unlimited, high-speed access to the Internet. All rooms in all dorms have long had an Ethernet port, intended to help us with our studies. Any student can plug in, call up the library's extensive database subscriptions, and hunt for journals, articles and other information on a boundless range of topics. Of course, with such power comes responsibility, for students can also visit the seedier and less, shall we say, academic nooks of the World Wide Web. In light of this, UMD began cracking down on Internet access and Networking capabilities on campus last year. First, the students' file-sharing capabilities were restricted. Many students grumbled, but the administration remained firm. Most recently, filters blocked the transfer of certain controversial file types. Student outcry led to a scaled-back version of the sentinel software, but the students haven't finished crusading. The school, they say, has infringed on our rights by installing restrictive programs between the Internet and us. University literature promises "free, unlimited" Internet access, and

Philadelphia- Analysis of Conflict and Unity Essay

The movie Philadelphia is mainly focused on one man, Andrew Beckett, against the discrimination he faces by the giant law firm he worked for. Andrew is aided in his battle by another man, Joe Miller. The director Jonathan Demm characterises both men to establish conflict and then unity. This is established through the use of various camera techniques, through the use of dialogue and also through the storyline by exemplifying their similarities and differences. Following the opening credit sequence of the city, we are immediately introduced to both the main characters, Andrew Beckett and Joe Miller. Both are introduced as lawyers and it is also evident that they are arguing against each other. This establishes a sense of difference and opposition. This impression is enhanced by the racial difference between the two, Joe being black and Andrew being white. At first both are shown in close ups, shown separately, however the camera shifts to a two shot which is used to show them in the same frame, sitting together. This is significant as it foreshadows their original conflict and eventual unity. After this confrontation both Andrew and Joe are shown in the elevator, behaving similarly, talking on their phones. Demm characterises both men so that even though a sense of conflict and opposition is established in the film, this scene demonstrates their similarities. This is used to establish a slight sense of unity; however it is mainly used to fo reshadow their eventual unanimity. Throughout the movie their similarities as well as differences have been accentuated to establish a sense of conflict and unity. Another example of their differences is towards the end of the film, when Andrew and Joe both attend a fancy dress party with their partners. This is the only time both couples are shown together and is especially significant when they are dancing. Andrew and his partner Miguel, are shown dancing together very closely, however the camera then shifts to Joe and his wife. This highlights their difference in sexual orientation and again establishes an ongoing sense of conflict, even though they have become quite close at this point. Another important scene which displays their similarities is in the library. Both men are there and the scene is used to parallel them, as a library is  connotation for learning. This similarity is used to establish unity and is further supported when Joe sit with Andrew to look over his notes. At first Joe leaves and then we physically see him torn between his personal opinion and justice. This again represents their conflict which is substantiated when Joe sits with Andrew; however he seems to be quite tense. The camera constantly shifts between close ups of both characters and then both are shown together in an aerial shot. Andrew is seen passing a law book to Joe who accepts it. The book represents the law and justice and that is what acts in unifying both characters, as Joe is seen as accepting the case. At the commencement of the case, and throughout the whole case, the camera plays an important role in showing the unity between Andrew and Joe. The camera constantly reverts to a two shot of Andrew and Joe which signifies their unity, and shows that they have overcome most of their original conflict however some of it still remains. While the case is going on, there is scene in a drug store, in which Andrew is approached by a homosexual footballer who asks Joe out. Joe is furious that he has been classed in the same bracket as Andrew, being gay. This shows that there is still a sense of ongoing conflict between Andrew and Joe, as Joe still seems uncomfortable on issues concerning homosexuality. Throughout the movie the dialogue plays an important role in showing the conflict and unity between Andrew and Joe. This is especially evident through the use of numerous quotes from Joe, regarding homosexuality and Andrew. When Andrew originally approaches Joe to represent him in court and Joe refuses it is because that Andrew is gay and has AIDS. Andrew asks Joe if he doesn’t accept the case for personal issues and Joe admits â€Å"Yes, that’s right†. This obviously shows that Joe is uncomfortable with Andrew and establishes a sense of conflict. This is again evident when he visits the doctor, worried that he might obtain AIDS. Joe then says to the doctor â€Å"I don’t like them; I don’t want this person to touch me†. Joe states his obvious discomfort against gays later in the film when he is in the pub. â€Å"These people make me sick but a law has been broken† is what Joe says when people are insulting him in the pub. All these various quotes show that there is obvious conflict between Andrew and Joe however the law is what  unifies them. In conclusion Demm uses many methods so that Andrew Beckett and Joe Miller are both characterised in the movie, to establish conflict and then unity. This is achieved through the use of various camera techniques and the use of various dialogues. It is also achieved through the actual storyline and the manner in which Andrew and Joe are juxtaposed to create a sense of conflict however their similarities are also highlighted to show their eventual unity. Philadelphia-www.imdb.com/title/tt0107818/

Iconographic Representation Of Jesus Christ Essay

Jesus Christ, by Christian tradition is known as the lamb of God or the sacrificial lamb, so he is symbolized by a very young lamb seated on a nest of thorns. Other than this Christ is also known as ‘the fisher of men’ which relates to the biblical story of how He was able to gather people into His flock so that they would submit to His teachings; so the ancient symbol for Christ is a simple illustration of the fish as shown in the collage. Other than this, this representation also has something to do with Christ’s words to Peter, when He said, â€Å"Come with me and I will make you fishers of men. This is also the reason why the Pope wears a ring known as ‘the fisherman’s ring† so symbolize his being the Vicar of Christ on earth. Another symbol which represent’s Christ is bread, because he also said during his lifetime, â€Å"I am the Bread of Life, whosoever partakes in my banquet shall have eternal life. †; Christ is also represented by fire, light or a flame because of his pronouncement that He â€Å"is the Way, the Truth, and the Light. †   Another symbol used in the collage is the chi-rho symbol which was an ancient way of writing the name Jesus Christ.

Would the World be a Better Place if Large-Scale Emigration to Other Planets were to be Possible?

Our world is in a predicament. The delicate balance that supports life that evolution (or God) has created is being tilted by deforestation, overfishing, increasing population, global warming and such, threatening the fundamentals for life. Planet Earth appears to be spiraling downwards towards an inescapable end. About half of the mature tropical forests, between 750 to 800 million hectares of the original 1. 5 to 1. 6 billion hectares that once covered the planet have been felled, and animals are becoming extinct more quickly than ever (experts have estimated that up to half of presently existing species may become extinct by 2100). Our main energy sources, oil and natural gas supplies, are rapidly running dry. The future of the earth, hilas, looks dark. Taking all of this into consideration, it appears that mass emigration to another planet might be the only solution. However, is it really too late to turn the clock? Or maybe more importantly, is it morally right to abandon ship when the storm is gathering? The damage we have caused to our world is both unbelievable and undeniable. Only 17% of planet Earth's landmass is still untouched by mankind (excluding Antarctica). Our world's natural oil and gas resources are soon fully consumed; renewable sources only stand for about 13% of the energy created. All the emissions from burning fossil fuels are carelessly released into the atmosphere, and as a result, the ozone layer is in an incredibly tattered shape. However, if we could move to another planet, thus leaving this one, the Earth would recuperate. The largest hole in the ozone, the one above the Antarctic, would, according to NASA scientists, recover by 2068. Similarly, if there were no humans to fish the oceans dry, and no humans to chop the forests down, slowly but steadily, the world's ecosystems would recover and the biodiversity would regain lost grounds. The human race has created this situation, and we owe it to the Earth and the other species that we reverse it. There are a number of valid arguments for saving our world by emigrating to another, and although leaving for another planet may save this one, abandoning Earth may not yet be necessary. All hope is not lost – it is still within our power to undo the damages ourselves. It will be a task of great difficulty, but one that we can pull off. Since when were problems solved by burying one's head in the sand? Besides, if you do bury your head in the sand, chances are, you won't like what you see when you stick it back up. Taking the emergency exit whenever there are bumps on the road will create a â€Å"laissez faire† mentality, which never has solved anything. If awareness of this crisis can be raised all around the world, and if people realize just how important the matter we are dealing with is, there is a significant chance that we can start acting in a sufficiently environmentally friendly manner for the previous natural balance to be restored, without us leaving Earth for a far-off planet. By abandoning the planet we do not solve the true problem, we simply run away from it. If we were all deported to another planet, but didn't change our behavior, all we would do is repeat the same mistakes we made on Earth. What does shifting planets mean if we still don't own up and take action to reverse the situation we have thrust ourselves into? If we recognize now that problems such as global warming, overfishing and deforestation are not resolved by turning our backs to them, it will also be understood that these will not vanish because we choose to flee from them. We must do something about the tribulations we have now, only then we can move on. Exporting our problems to another planet is not solving them. Furthermore, there is also is a moral aspect to this issue. It would be indecent and ethically incorrect to simply change planets and abandon earth when we are encountering real and serious problems which in addition are caused by ourselves This world is optimal for our form of life. If just the weight of the proton in the air molecule was the slightest bit different all life on earth would be impossible. Similarly, if aliens would visit Earth, they would die of inhaling oxygen. It is an incredible chain of circumstances that allow us to live by breathing oxygen. The human race has become adapted to live on planet Earth over millions and millions of years of evolution. Just like a hole is perfect for the water puddle it contains, Earth is perfect for man. This taken into consideration, we can't just destroy this Earth, and then leave it without the slightest effort to do something about it. We were made for this planet, and now that it is being destroyed, the very least we can do is to try to reverse what we've done. In any case, fleeing should be the very last option. All of us who inhabit Earth have inherited it from earlier generations. We are merely the present caretakers of this Earth, just like thousands of generations before us have been. Therefore, we have a moral responsibility, both towards our children as well as to our ancestors, to protect and preserve something extraordinary that no one ever can own, only borrow. On the one hand, it is a fact that we are well on the way of destroying Earth, and if all human beings were to leave the Earth, there is a chance that the Earth might recover. However, this is only true if all humans are transported to another planet. The question was â€Å"would the world be a better place if large-scale emigration to other planets were to be possible? † Upon a closer look, mass emigration does not necessarily mean that all humans are transported, rather just some. This is certainly of importance, as it is not necessarily the number of people on Earth that decides if the world is going to recuperate or not. What is more important is how the people who actually do live here treat the environment, i e how much carbon emissions are released into the atmosphere, how much fish we fish from our seas and how many trees we cut from our forests. If 50% of the world's population was evacuated to another planet, but the remaining 50% treated the environment worse than before, the problems would not be solved. Rather than focusing on efficient ways to deport masses of people to other planets, we should focus on efficient ways to save this planet, with us on it. On the other hand, it is probably true that the abandoning of the planet will have to occur sooner or later. 99. 9% of all species ever to reside on planet Earth are now extinct. Mankind will certainly not be an exception. Even if we don't drive ourselves into extinction, or a comet crashing into Earth doesn't do it for us, in about one billion years the sun will start dying. It will slowly begin to swell up, and produce more heat, making life on this entire solar system impossible. If the ultimate aim of mankind is survival, emigration to another planet might then be the only option. However, this is not the case today. We still have an option; so let us take advantage of it.