评论
打印
Business
商业版块
Bartleby A shot in the dark
巴托比职场专栏——无根据的瞎猜
How far should firms go to get their staff vaccinated?
为了让员工接种疫苗，企业还要走多远？
The pandemic is throwing up a new set of ethical issues for businesses. The premise of “stakeholder capitalism” is not just that firms should consider the interests of employees and customers, as well as shareholders. It is that, by doing so, everyone gains; shareholders will prosper if workers and customers are treated decently. But the pandemic may put different groups at odds. For example, customers may want companies to insist that all employees are vaccinated, while not wanting the same rule to apply to themselves.
新冠疫情给企业带来了一系列新的道德问题。“利害关系者权益理论”的前提不仅仅是企业应该考虑员工和客户的利益，股东的利益也举足轻重。而且这样的行为会让所有人受益；如果员工和客户得到合宜的对待，股东也将兴旺发达。但这次疫情可能会使不同的群体产生分歧。比如说，客户可能希望公司坚持要求所有员工都接种疫苗，却不希望同样的规则适用于自己。
It might seem as if shareholders would want as many employees to return to work as possible, few potential customers to be excluded, and interactions in, say, shops and restaurants to be as free from restrictions as possible. But if a company gets a reputation for being an unsafe place to work, or for customers to visit, the effect on longterm returns could be significant. The perception of fairness is also essential. Woe betide the executive who jumps the queue, as in the case of Mark Machin, a Canadian pensionfund boss who travelled to the United Arab Emirates to get the jab. (He swiftly resigned.)
似乎股东们会希望尽可能多的员工重返工作岗位，公司也不要排斥潜在客户的到访，商店和餐馆等地的互动也尽可能不受限制。但是，如果一家公司因办公场所不安全，存在工作或客户来访隐患而名声大噪，这对公司长期回报的影响可能是巨大的。对公平的认识也很重要。积极抢先的高管会遇到麻烦，比如，加拿大养老基金经理马克·梅钦前往阿联酋接受注射。（但他很快就辞职了。）
Companies are not just trading off safety and personal liberty. They risk discriminating against those who have yet to gain access to the vaccine or who, for religious or medical reasons, are unwilling or unable to be jabbed. And they do not have complete freedom of action. The legal situation will vary from country to country but it seems likely that, in many jurisdictions, companies will be able to insist on a vaccine mandate only for new employees.
公司不仅仅是在牺牲安全和人身自由。公司有可能歧视那些尚未接种疫苗的人，或那些由于宗教或医学原因而不愿意或不能注射疫苗的人。公司没有完全的行动自由。各国的法律情况各不相同，但许多管辖区的公司可能坚持要求新员工接种疫苗。
The question of vaccination is particularly pressing in health care. One might hope that medical workers would appreciate the need for it. Yet some healthcare personnel may feel that having had covid-19, as many have, negates the obligation. Laura Boudreau of Columbia Business School in New York observes that, in this type of industry, “there is a duty for the employer to try to identify safe roles that the staff can play, and if not, to provide information to customers about whether there are unvaccinated staff in the role.” In other words, unvaccinated staff may end up being kept away from vulnerable patients.
疫苗问题在医疗服务领域尤为紧迫。人们可能希望医务工作者理解接种疫苗的必要性。然而，一些医护人员可能会觉得自己的患者大多已经感染了新冠肺炎，从而否定了接种义务。纽约哥伦比亚商学院的劳拉·布德劳指出，在医疗服务行业中，“雇主有责任设法确定其员工的安全性，不然，他们要向患者提供有关信息，明确是否有未接种疫苗的医务人员参与服务。”换而言之，未接种疫苗的医护人员最终可能要避开易感染患者。
译文由可可原创，仅供学习交流使用，未经许可请勿转载。
