Section B

(40 Marks)

BAGB2033 Corporate Social POLICY

There is ONE (1) case study in this section. Answer all questions in the answer booklet.

Monitoring of Employee Medical BenefitsBlessing or Irony?

Established corporations will normally provide medical benefits to employees as a human resource strategy to attract competent people to join the organization. Such benefits will also be formally stated in an employment service agreement signed between the employee and employer. Medical benefits will include general as well as specialized treatment by a panel of medical practitioners at public and selected private hospitals.

In the 1980s and 1990s, the Human Resource (HR) Department used to appoint officers to directly handle and administer employee medical benefits. Employees were given trust and freedom to approach panel clinics and hospitals for treatment based on the medical complications that prevail. Panel clinic doctors would in turn assess and propose selected patients to see medical specialists if their complications further require specific medical treatments.

However, the 21st century introduced the role of insurance corporations to administer employee medical benefits for various reasons. Apart from being a cost-cutting measure, organizations perceive that employees are no more honest in the use of the medical benefits.

Employers view that employees take advantage of the benefits given, so much so that further scrutiny needs to be undertaken by an appointed insurance company to justify utilization of specialist treatment at private hospitals, not to mention the type of medication prescribed.

Puan llya is an executive employee at KMG Multimedia Corporation (KMG). She has knee problem, a prolonged illness due to excessive walking and travelling in the course of doing her job. Because of excessive pain, Puan llya went to see a panel general clinic doctor who then referred her to an orthopedic specialist at another private hospital. She was hopeful for a speedy recovery to resume work normally after being prescribed Vitryl 5, a glucose-calcium based medication by the orthopedic specialist. To her surprise, when she went to the hospital pharmacy to collect the prescribed medication, the cashier told her to pay for the medication as it had been classified as supplements instead of medication by the insurance corporation appointed by her employer.

When Puan llya double-checked with the HR department of KMG, they also informed her that the knee problem medication, Vitryl 5, is not going to be covered by the employer since it is a supplement, not medicine. The HR officer further emphasized that this is in line with the insurance corporations' general guidelines on medical benefits.

Coincidentally, Puan llya did not bring sufficient cash at that point in time. In a state of disappointment, she left the hospital without purchasing Vitryl S. While coping with her knee pain on the way home, several issues came to her mind. She even checked the employment service contract after returning to office. There was indeed no written procedure on the supplement issue under medical benefits within the clauses in her original employment service contract.

Source: Khalidah Khalid Ali, Zulkufly Ramly and Lau Teck Chai, Oxford Fajar, 2016

Required:

1. Outline and explain TWO (2) ethical issues in this case. (10 Marks)
2. Discuss with FOUR (4) points, employees' and employers' obligation in ensuring occupational safety and health at work, based on this case. (10 Marks)
3. Is it fair for KMG Multimedia Corporation to ask Puan llya to bear the medical cost for treating her knee problem? Justify your answer using TWO (2) ethical theories or principles. (10 Marks)
4. Suggest TWO (2) ways to resolve Puan llya's health problem in a 'win-win' situation. (10 Marks)