Jillian
Salary: $60,000
Justification:
In Aristotle’s eyes, Jillian’s relevant differences would be her experience as a UCP officer for a year, and for work performance, her outside work beneficial to law enforcement for 12 years (studying crime trends, crime mapping, and crime prevention). If Aristotle were distributing the $250,000 among the 5 officers, he would divide it evenly into $50,000 per officer, because Aristotle would assume at first that all the officers are equal. However, Aristotle would fluctuate each officer’s salary based on relevant differences, such as experience, and how the officers perform their jobs. A police officer’s main job is to arrest people who commit crimes that threaten others, and keep the populace safe. …show more content…
For his efforts, Lawrence should be praised for his work ethic, and the amount of felony/misdemeanor arrests he’s performed. However, Lawrence’s experience working in law enforcement has only begun to grow; he is still on employment probation, and being in the UCP is his first-time job in law enforcement. He also doesn’t have natural strengths in problem-solving and working with others, thus hurting salary potential. For his newly budding experience of 6 months, $10,000 will be deducted from the original $50,000 of an Aristotelian sense. Lawrence’s ability to follow orders without question and his helpfulness towards colleagues is what keeps the salary afloat at …show more content…
If so, give examples and explain why. If not, why not (be detailed).
I would see situations where Aristotle’s definition of justice would’ve been helpful. I feel that community reception is a gray area; Officer Amy was seen as aggressive by the community and colleagues, despite her salary being justified by experience and work performance/accomplishments. While it is good to be known, it’s important to be seen in a positive light, and not someone to be constantly feared. If Aristotle took community reception into account, he would feel as if though Amy has undeserved wealth.
(4) How would Rawls suggest that the salaries should be divided?
Rawls would suggest that the salaries should be divided by community reception. This would benefit Officer Jillian the most because while she performs her job as a law enforcer, she has a very positive standing with the community, despite having not made any arrests yet. However, Rawls’s suggestion would hurt Officer Amy the most, in that she the most aggressive of all the officers labeled by community and colleagues, thus being a candidate for
Salary: $60,000
Justification:
In Aristotle’s eyes, Jillian’s relevant differences would be her experience as a UCP officer for a year, and for work performance, her outside work beneficial to law enforcement for 12 years (studying crime trends, crime mapping, and crime prevention). If Aristotle were distributing the $250,000 among the 5 officers, he would divide it evenly into $50,000 per officer, because Aristotle would assume at first that all the officers are equal. However, Aristotle would fluctuate each officer’s salary based on relevant differences, such as experience, and how the officers perform their jobs. A police officer’s main job is to arrest people who commit crimes that threaten others, and keep the populace safe. …show more content…
For his efforts, Lawrence should be praised for his work ethic, and the amount of felony/misdemeanor arrests he’s performed. However, Lawrence’s experience working in law enforcement has only begun to grow; he is still on employment probation, and being in the UCP is his first-time job in law enforcement. He also doesn’t have natural strengths in problem-solving and working with others, thus hurting salary potential. For his newly budding experience of 6 months, $10,000 will be deducted from the original $50,000 of an Aristotelian sense. Lawrence’s ability to follow orders without question and his helpfulness towards colleagues is what keeps the salary afloat at …show more content…
If so, give examples and explain why. If not, why not (be detailed).
I would see situations where Aristotle’s definition of justice would’ve been helpful. I feel that community reception is a gray area; Officer Amy was seen as aggressive by the community and colleagues, despite her salary being justified by experience and work performance/accomplishments. While it is good to be known, it’s important to be seen in a positive light, and not someone to be constantly feared. If Aristotle took community reception into account, he would feel as if though Amy has undeserved wealth.
(4) How would Rawls suggest that the salaries should be divided?
Rawls would suggest that the salaries should be divided by community reception. This would benefit Officer Jillian the most because while she performs her job as a law enforcer, she has a very positive standing with the community, despite having not made any arrests yet. However, Rawls’s suggestion would hurt Officer Amy the most, in that she the most aggressive of all the officers labeled by community and colleagues, thus being a candidate for