Main Body
My response to the actions against me:
my response would stand on the ground that I have done no harm to the organisation and violated no procedure as it is my duty and responsibility to uphold the dignity and interests of staff serving under me. Also, my action was in line with Humanism and deontological ethics and I have treated human beings as end in themselves.
Options available against the actions:
It might save me from further troubles. | → It will defeat the original cause of upholding against justice.
(merit) | (demerit)
It might give my Head to reconsider his hasteful decision. | → might not lead any tangible outcome as boss has already made his mind.
(merit) | (demerit)
Here justice will be ensured. → Also, employees under my command will be saved. | → might further cause embarrassment to the organization & Head.
⇒ I would try my best to continue the Head but if he ignores then I will go ahead with legal action and it is the silence of oppressed which gives authority to oppressor.
— Ankur Tripathi
Conclusion
33 words
- Reference to ethical frameworks (Humanism, Deontology)
- Systematic presentation of options with merits/demerits
- Clear merit-demerit analysis of each option
- Strong concluding quote about oppression
- Systematic escalation strategy
Ankur Tripathi
Response to Disciplinary Action
Options for Addressing Retaliation
Compliance vs Continued Advocacy
256
Total words
11
Paragraphs
Deliberative and analytical
Tone