You are the Regional Head of Human Resources for a large financial institution with offices globally. The organisation has recently made a public statement about their commitment to climate action and released a climate action plan.
All employees globally are now required to have their email signatures include a link to the public statement and action plan. The signature graphic states "We support climate action".
An employee in Sydney – Frank - has requested a meeting with your team. He is an active member of the diversity and inclusion committee and manages the training for Sydney employees. Frank is a high performing employee and has a great reputation across the business and is highly influential on organisational culture.
Frank tells you that he has a personal objection to the organisation’s Climate Action Plan and does not wish to include the mandatory branding for the campaign on his company email signature. He believes that as an organisation who supports employees bringing their whole selves to work, the organisation should respect a diversity of views including employees who feel that their personal values are being compromised by their duties.
Head office has stated that this is a priority and all employees with a company email address must be onboarded to support the changes.
WHAT WOULD YOU DO?
We challenge you to create a healthy discussion with your colleagues and post a comment below. You could even encourage them to consider taking The Banking and Finance Oath!
Please share your ethical dilemmas with us - we can post them anonymously. You can email your dilemmas to firstname.lastname@example.org
Photo by Karsten Würth on Unsplash