Case Study: Theft of Company Property
Wilton Petroleum Company is a wholesale distributor of a major brand of gasoline. Gasoline is shipped on barges from the refinery to the company. The company then delivers the gasoline to retail gas stations for sale to motorists. Each gasoline tanker truck is an 18-wheel vehicle that carried 9,000 gallons of gasoline. A 20-foot hose that extended from the truck permits the driver to fill the tanks at each gas station. The gasoline that is pumped out of the truck into underground holding tanks at the gas stations is monitored precisely by a meter on the tanker truck that records the amount of gasoline that is pumped from the truck. Thus, the company knows exactly how many gallons of gasoline were pumped into the holding tanks at each gas station, and it knows exactly how many gallons were pumped out of each tanker truck. Every day each driver records the total volume of gasoline delivered. The total volume pumped out of the truck has to equal the total volume of gasoline pumped into the holding tanks. The company considered any discrepancy between the two amounts as evidence of theft by the drivers.
But, the company knew that there was a slight flaw in the system used to monitor the flow of gasoline out of the tanker. The meter recorded the flow of gasoline out of the tanker; however, about 3 gallons of gasoline in the 20-foot hose was always underrecorded. That was the gasoline that had flowed out of the truck but did not enter the holding tanks.
One truck driver, Lew Taylor, thought he had found a way to "beat the system" and to steal gasoline for his personal use. After making all his scheduled deliveries for the day, he extended the full length of the hose on the ground and let gravity drain the gasoline from the hose. This typically yielded about 3 gallons of gas. The pump and the meter were not on, so there was no record of any gasoline leaving the tank. However, based on the very small but repeated shortages in his tanker truck compared to those of other drivers, company officials knew that Taylor was siphoning the gasoline. The value of the gasoline stolen each day was minimal, but the cumulative value was considerable.
Michael Morris, operations manager of the company, knew Taylor had found a loophole in the monitoring system and was stealing gasoline, but could not prove it. Morris decided to lay a trap for Taylor and "planted" a company hammer on a chair at the entrance to the room where the drivers changed their clothes after work. Morris then had a small hole drilled in the wall to observe the chair. He thought that if Taylor stole the gasoline, he might also be tempted to steal the hammer. The trap worked. Taylor was seen placing the company tool under his jacket as he walked out the door. On a signal from Morris, security officers approached Taylor and asked about the hammer. Taylor produced the hammer, was led by the security officers to Morris' office where he was immediately fired. Although Taylor had stolen hundreds of dollars worth of gasoline from his employer, he was terminated for stealing a hammer worth about $10.
Discuss the circumstances described in the Case Study and how you as an I/O Psychologist should handle them. Support your responses with current research. In your paper, address the following questions:
Question 1. If you were Morris, and if Taylor had been a conscientious employee in all other areas, would you still have fired Taylor for committing theft? Why or why not?
Question 2. Do you think Taylor "got what was coming to him" in this case, or was he "set up" by Morris and thus was a victim of entrapment?
Question 3. Do you think that spying on the employees with peepholes and cameras to detect theft or other crime violates an ethical business principle? Why do you feel as you do?
Question 4. What effect might Taylor's dismissal by the company have on other employees?