Analyzing Gender Imbalance: Ethical Prioritization in Australian Jobs

This essay delves into the ethical considerations surrounding the prioritization of female job applicants by Australian companies, aiming to rectify gender imbalances in the workplace. It contrasts Kantian and Utilitarian ethics to evaluate the ethical implications of such policies. Kantian ethics emphasizes individual rights and intentions, while Utilitarianism focuses on the greater good. The essay presents arguments for and against prioritizing female applicants, considering both the promotion of gender equality and the potential impact on organizational efficiency and fairness to all applicants. It concludes that while gender equality is a noble goal, recruitment should primarily be based on skills and organizational needs, ensuring that business companies can achieve their objectives without causing societal harm. Desklib provides access to this and many other solved assignments for students.

Running head: ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS
ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS
Name of the student
Name of the university
Author note

1ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS
Topic: Should Australian companies give priority to female job applicants for rectifying
gender imbalance?
Introduction
Gender equality is considered to be an important facet in the present business situation
around the world. Based on the government principle of Australia, it can be started that gender
equality in workplace can be achieved through getting same rewards, facilities and opportunities
in organization. In this regard, there are significant issues that the Australian workforce is still
witnessed in terms of women earn less than men and get major setbacks while advancing their
careers due to lack of facility. Therefore, this research is going to find out the significance of
prioritizing female job applicants by the Australian company from the ethical perspective.
Therefore, Kantian and Utilitarian ethics are also incorporated into the discussion.
Difference between Kantian and utilitarian ethics
The difference between Kantianism and Utilitarianism is bestowed within the principles
and very nature of the ethical theories. Han (2015) articulated that the role of Kantian ethics is to
determine ethical practice on the basis of individual righteousness. On the other hand, from the
article of Halinen and Jokela (2016) it can be stated that utilitarian principle is definitely
followed a broader picture in terms of propagating the greater good. Based on this fundamental
perspectives, it can be stated that both the ethical principles are guided by different
instrumentation. It is true that serving good for people is the ultimate focal point that both the
ethical theories are trying to support. However, the way of achieving good is different. It can be
stated that the role of Kantian ethics is to evaluate the deep insights into an individual aspiration
and finds out the way to bring ethical actions. In other words, Gomes (2017) opined that
categorical imperative is the foundation basis of Kantian ethics that argued about a universal

2ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS
action or will of mankind that paves the way for ethical performance. Therefore, it can be stated
that Kantian ethics generally pointed out the reason behind doing ethically sound activities. On
the contrary, Utilitarian principle advocated that ethics should be based on serving greater good
for the greater number of people. From this perception it can be derived that the Utilitarian
principle is advocated about the result of an activity which determines the degree of ethical
standpoint. Therefore, the objectivity and the way of achieving ethical point of view is very
different between Kantian and Utilitarian ethics.
Two arguments for and two arguments against the case
As far as the Kantian ethics is concerned, it can be stated that prioritizing the female job
applicants is undoubtedly an ethical action from the company’s perspective because the will of
the company to create a gender equality in workplace would be achieved. The Kantian ethics
focuses on the individual preferences. Therefore, it is also rational for the female job applicants
to get adequate exposure to prove their abilities and skills.
In addition to this, the greater good for the greatest number of people is the core principle
of Utilitarianism. Henceforth, it is also important to empower women in the society by providing
the same exposure that their male counterparts get. Equality in gender cannot be settled through
different programs and events rather it has to have a practical implication so that the males in
society also corroborate the fact of gender equality (Alberici, 2018). It is the only way to bring
greater good for the people by incorporating greatest number of people in the form of
incorporating the females in jobs and business.
On the other hand, the Kantian ethics also propounded the individual aspiration and free
will that can generate ethically sound measure. Therefore, the business companies should also

3ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS
the liberty to choose their employees specifically. If there is no need of female employees or
works that need the male employees only then it will also be considered as ethically sound.
Moreover, from the point of view of Utilitarianism, using blind recruitment will never be
able to achieve better result for the organization without focusing on the ability of the applicants
to do the job. Emphasizing on female employees can jeopardize the greatest good for the
organization. Therefore, it is an ethical dilemma for prioritizing female employees only in
workplace.
Conclusion
Based on the above discussion, it can be stated that gender equality is a benevolent
practice that the business companies can opt for but it should be kept in mind that the recruitment
should be based on skills and need of the organization. There will be no breach of ethical
standpoint if the organization is willing to fulfill its objectives. Without having any detrimental
impact on the society the business companies can make its own policy as per needs.

4ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS
References
Alberici, E. (2018). Progress on gender equality has 'stalled', new advocacy group argues.
Retrieved 4 September 2019, from https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-19/gender-gap-
persists-alliance-formed-to-close-it/10280618
Han, H. (2015). Virtue ethics, positive psychology, and a new model of science and engineering
ethics education. Science and Engineering Ethics, 21(2), 441-460. Retrieved from
https://philpapers.org/archive/HANVEP.pdf
Gomes, A. (2017). Naïve realism in Kantian phrase. Mind, 126(502), 529-578. Retrieved from
https://philarchive.org/archive/GOMNRI
Halinen, A., & Jokela, P. (2016). Exploring ethics in business networks: Propositions for future
research. In Extending the Business Network Approach (pp. 333-356). Palgrave Macmillan,
London. Retrieved from https://www.impgroup.org/uploads/papers/8204.pdf