This fall, a teenager, let's call him Ken, has been
settling in as a freshman at a large state university. Three months in, he
appears to have found a good rhythm in balancing his coursework and social
life.
Ken has a voracious appetite. He's a slender kid, but the
workouts and schedule he maintains keep him hungry. His parents helped him
choose wisely when they chose the dining hall meal plan providing for unlimited
meals and in-between snacks at the campus dining halls.
For the most part, that dining choice has worked well.
Ken can choose from among the three dining halls on campus, alternating his
choices depending on what specials might be on the menu each day.
"Some of my friends don't like the food at some of
the dining halls," Ken writes, "so we go together to eat where
everyone likes the food."
All was going well for Ken, until he met his nemesis,
let's call him Larry. Larry is the manager of the dining hall where Ken often
eats lunch. If you're on the meal plan Ken's on, you can eat all you want in
the dining hall, but the rules are that you cannot take food outside of the
dining hall. Occasionally, Ken says he's grabbed an apple or two or some other
snack on his way out of a dining hall and the managers at the two other dining
halls never say anything. But Larry stops Ken each time and tells him he can't
take food out of the dining hall.
"I'm paying thousands of dollars to go here and he
won't let me take an extra apple," Ken protests. "He also stopped me
when I was eating an ice cream cone I had made after lunch."
Ken has always complied when Larry called him out. He
writes that once when Larry confronted him about an apple in his hand, he
tossed it in the trash before leaving, "just to make a point."
Who's right here, Ken wants to know. "Shouldn't I be
able to eat without being hassled?"
Yes, of course, Ken should be able to eat without being
hassled. But Larry is simply doing his job. That the rules are inconsistently
enforced from one dining hall to the next shouldn't matter since Ken is obliged
to follow the rules of the dining hall he's in at the time.
Throwing away an apple in protest is wasteful and likely
did not have the effect of changing the situation for which Ken yearned. Eating
the apple on the spot before he left would have been fine.
But Larry was wrong to call Ken on the ice cream cone he
was midway through eating as he was leaving. If the policy is in place to keep
students from taking food to use outside the dining hall rather than purchase
their own food later, telling students they can't finish eating items they've
already started to consume misses the spirit of the rule and achieves nothing
aside from a bravado show of authority.
The right thing is for Larry to let Ken finish eating his
ice cream cone in peace and for Ken to honor the rules Larry is charged with
enforcing by not carrying uneaten food from the dining hall. Each of them
deserves respect from one another, regardless of how agitated they become.
Jeffrey L. Seglin, author of The Simple Art of Business Etiquette: How to Rise to the Top by Playing Nice, is a senior lecturer in public policy and director of the communications program at Harvard's Kennedy School. He is also the administrator of www.jeffreyseglin.com, a blog focused on ethical issues.
Do you have ethical questions that you need answered? Send them to rightthing@comcast.net.
Follow him on Twitter: @jseglin
(c) 2017 JEFFREY L. SEGLIN. DISTRIBUTED BY TRIBUNE CONTENT AGENCY, LLC.
1 comment:
This says it all: "Each of them deserves respect from one another".
Rules have a purpose. Larry is tasked with enforcing the rules. Is it reasonable to take an apple to eat for dessert while you are walking back to your dorm or the library? I think so. But that's not what the rules say.
If Ken disagrees with the rules and it's obvious he does, he should address the issue with the people who make the rules - the school's administrators.
Maya Angelou said it best: "If you don't like something, change it. If you can't change it, change your attitude. Don't complain."
Post a Comment