Final answer:
Companies often cite the utilitarian approach to justify the policing of employees' personal habits, which is based on the idea of promoting the greatest good for the greatest number. This approach involves analyzing the consequences of actions to determine their morality, with the goal of improving overall happiness and well-being.
Option 'a' is the correct.
Step-by-step explanation:
The question of which ethical approach companies are citing to justify policing of employee's personal habits such as alcohol and tobacco consumption, both on and off the job, is a topic of business ethics.
The approach often cited is the utilitarian approach, which is a form of consequentialism. This moral theory suggests that the morality of an action is determined by its outcomes or consequences. In a workplace context, companies may argue that by encouraging or enforcing certain personal habits among employees, they are promoting the greater good, which could include improved productivity, better health outcomes for the employees, or reduced healthcare costs.
The utilitarian approach focuses on the calculation of the greatest happiness for the greatest number. Applied to the workplace, this approach involves a cost-benefit analysis where the positive and negative impacts on all stakeholders must be considered. This could lead to policies that restrict personal habits like smoking or drinking, with the justification that these policies will lead to a healthier, more efficient, and ultimately happier workforce.
It is important to note, however, that such policies must be implemented with care to ensure they do not infringe on individual rights or lead to unjust discriminations. Tools like act utilitarianism might be employed to assess decisions on a case-by-case basis, allowing companies to apply the greatest happiness principle to individual situations. The consideration of well-being is central here, referring to what is good for a person beyond mere abstract notions of happiness.