An Ethical Dilemma

The Case of the Pizza Purveyor

Alison

Alison works in the international student office of a medium-sized public university. She—like most other staff in the office—wears many hats: corresponding with international students wishing to improve their English or enroll as undergraduates at her institution; processing applications; making certain that all appropriate forms have been signed and paperwork prepared for the various U.S. agencies requiring them; advising international students once they are on campus; and assisting them as they adapt to American culture.

Alison

Alison’s job is very detail oriented, her work hours are long, each day is different from the previous one, and the office is understaffed and under-resourced, requiring everyone to do far more than his/her job description requires. Because the students Alison and her staff deal with are not American citizens, there are strict guidelines placed on their presence here by the United States government and many of its agencies, by state and local governing bodies, and by the govern- ments of students’ home countries.

The Incident

On a Sunday evening, Alison, her husband and several of their friends gather at Alison’s to watch the Patriots game. Alison sets out munchies and her husband proffers beer and wine. Shortly before the half, Alison calls a nearby pizza parlor and orders three large pies.

When the doorbell rings, she answers it. Opening the front door, she’s surprised to see Edgar, one of her ESL students, holding out the pizzas and a bill for $37.50.

The Regulations

As an educational institution Alison’s employer must adhere to very strict government rules and protocols where international students are concerned. The Office of Homeland Security, which oversees the Office of Immigration and Naturalization, places strict regulations on foreign nationals entering America on student visas.

One of these restrictions concerns employment while in the United States.

The RegulationsInternational students holding F-1 status are allowed to work 20 hours or less at a campus job while school is in session. They are also eligible under certain circumstances to obtain employment authorization for Curricular Practical Training (CPT), which is defined by US immigration regulations as employment that is an “integral part of an established curriculum.”

They are not allowed to accept off-campus work as pizza deliverymen, gas station attendants—or anything not connected to their academic studies.

Alison’s Dilemma

On the one hand, the government obligates Alison to report international students who are working illegally if she has “constructive knowledge,” which she has in Edgar’s case.

Alison also knows that many of her international students are overwhelmed by the cost of living in the United States. For many, taking a part-time job is a way to earn extra spending money for essentials, like books, and a few pleasantries.

Ethical Principles That Apply

The CAS standards have strong policies and guidelines pertaining to ethics in higher education. In seeking an appropriate solution to her dilemma, Alison would benefit from considering the following guidelines. Pledge to do no harm

Would informing the student that he must give up his employment prove harmful to him financially? Would turning a blind eye harm immigrations services in any way?

Work toward positive and beneficial outcomes Would ignoring an infraction such as this prove beneficial to the

student?

Ethical Principles That Apply Operate within the framework of laws and policies

By not reminding the student of the law and encouraging him to voluntarily give up his employment—or not reporting him to immigration—is Alison doing something illegal?

Be faithful to an obligation, trust, or duty Alison has two obligations: to the law and to her student. Both are

equally compelling, but she must make a choice.

Act with integrity and honesty in all endeavors and interactions

If Alison chooses to ignore immigration regulations, is she behaving with integrity?

Critical Thinking Process

In this obligation-to-the law vs. concern-for-her-student’s-welfare decision, Alison believes that on the one hand she must honor the government’s regulations and ask Edgar to give up his job. It is the right thing to do. On the other hand, she knows how important it is to Edgar to get an education in the United States. She knows that he is struggling financially, and admires him for having the initiative and motivation to get a job while carrying a full course load.

Critical Thinking ProcessAmong the questions Alison might consider when making her decision are the following: Which choice produces the greatest good? If I ignore the law, am I putting my job and my institution’s integrity in

jeopardy? If I follow the law, and Edgar is forced to give up his job, will he have to leave the university and return to his home country, his dream unfulfilled? Is there a way I can uphold the law and assist Edgar at the same time?

What should Alison do?

ResolutionI believe Alison has an obligation—especially as an advisor to international students in this country—to uphold the laws; laws of which she is well aware. I also believe Alison has an obligation to the welfare of her students; she has an obligation to see that they succeed.

If I were Alison, I would speak to Edgar privately. I would tell him how proud I am of his motivation and work ethic, then remind him of the restrictions on his visa. I would tell him the decision is his, and let him make that decision. This scenario, I think, allows Alison to act ethically. If Edgar continues to work, for his sake I don’t believe Alison would report him.

Resolution

I believe Alison would instead remove herself from situations that would put her in contact with him when he was working.

I believe Alison would also start making pulled pork sliders at home rather than ordering out during football games.

Margo W. R. SteinerEDU 985 A

Practicum in Student Affairs I

November 14, 2010