Why Do Some Employees Show Up For Work In Severe Snow

Why Do Some Employees Show Up For Work During A Severe Snow Storm Wher

Why do some employees show up for work during a severe snow storm whereas others make no effort to leave their home? We know organizational injustice can occur in the classroom as well as in the workplace. Identify classroom situations in which you experienced feelings of injustice. What can instructors do to maintain an environment that fosters both distributive and procedural justice? Your initial discussion should be at least 250 words.

Paper For Above instruction

During severe snowstorms, the decision of whether employees show up for work often hinges on multiple factors, including personal commitment, perceived organizational support, and individual perceptions of fairness. Some employees choose to brave harsh weather conditions because they feel a sense of responsibility or fear of negative repercussions if they do not attend. Others might have critical roles that cannot be easily substituted, prompting their effort to reach the workplace regardless of the weather. Conversely, employees without such commitments or those feeling unsupported by the organization may opt to stay home, prioritizing safety over attendance. These choices reflect underlying perceptions of organizational justice, specifically distributive and procedural justice.

Organizational justice theory emphasizes employees’ perceptions of fairness in the distribution of resources and outcomes (distributive justice), as well as the fairness of processes used to determine these outcomes (procedural justice). When employees perceive fairness—such as equitable treatment, transparent decision-making, and recognition of individual circumstances—they are more likely to display high commitment and loyalty, even during adverse conditions. Conversely, perceptions of injustice may result in decreased motivation, absenteeism, or disengagement. For instance, if a company enforces strict attendance policies during a snowstorm without taking individual safety into account, employees may feel that their concerns are disregarded, leading to perceptions of procedural injustice.

In the classroom setting, a similar sense of injustice can arise when students feel that grading policies are unfair or when instructors favor certain students over others without clear communication. For example, inconsistent grading or lack of transparency in assessment criteria may make students feel unfairly treated, impacting their motivation and engagement. To foster an environment of both distributive and procedural justice, educators should ensure transparent grading policies, provide consistent feedback, and accommodate individual circumstances when possible. Clear communication about expectations and evaluation criteria helps students understand how their performance is assessed, reinforcing perceptions of fairness. Additionally, involving students in decision-making processes related to their learning can enhance their sense of procedural justice, promoting a more equitable and motivating classroom environment.

In sum, perceptions of fairness significantly influence how employees and students respond to organizational or instructional policies during challenging circumstances. By prioritizing transparency, consistency, and responsiveness to individual needs, organizations and educators can foster environments where justice is perceived to be upheld, thereby enhancing engagement, trust, and overall organizational or academic success.

References

• Cohen-Charash, Y., & Spector, P. E. (2001). The role of justice in organizations: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 86(2), 278-321.
• Greenberg, J. (1990). Organizational justice: Yesterday, today, and tomorrow. Journal of Management, 16(2), 399-432.
• Moorman, R. H. (1991). Relationship between organizational justice and organizational citizenship behaviors: Do fairness perceptions influence employee citizenship? Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(6), 845-855.
• Folger, R., & Cropanzano, R. (1998). Constructive justice: The fairness heuristic hypothesis. In R. Cropanzano (Ed.), Handbook of Organizational Justice (pp. 3–34). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Colquitt, J. A., Greenberg, J., & Zapata-Phelan, C. P. (2005). What is organizational justice? A historical overview. In J. Greenberg & J. A. Colquitt (Eds.), Handbook of Organizational Justice (pp. 3–56). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Tyler, T. R. (1994). Advances in group processes: The psychology of procedural justice. Psychology Press.
• Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. Plenum Press.
• Bies, R. J., & Moag, J. F. (1986). Interactional justice: Communication criteria of fairness. Research on Negotiation in Organizations, 1, 43-55.
• Ambrose, M. L., & Schminke, M. (2009). The influence of organizational justice on employee attitudes and behaviors. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 317-344.
• McFarlin, D. B., & Sweeney, P. D. (1992). Perceptions of injustice: An empirical test of distributive and procedural justice theories. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77(4), 726-735.