On July 18, 2022, transgender employees of Kochi Metro Rail Limited revealed several sad stories of discrimination, low salary, and inaccessible toilets in the workplace. The publicly owned company based in Kochi, India aimed to be seen as among the most sustainable and connected organizations in the country. In 2017, the company made a conscious effort to hire transgender candidates into primary positions. After hiring 1,000 women and 23 transgender employees as part of its social inclusion initiative, Kochi Metro Rail Limited earned praise from the public as an inclusive workplace. The company soon reached a high of 43 transgender employees, but that number dropped considerably down to nine employees within only five years, after issues and disappointments surfaced among the workforce. The transgender community saw the company’s transgender employee policy as a promotional stunt to gain publicity and public attention. To regain its former status among India’s top companies for social inclusion, it was imperative for Kochi Metro Rail Limited to quickly find a way to attract and retain transgender employees.
In July 2022, the joint general manager of personnel and administration at the Indian Farmers Fertilizer Cooperative Limited (IFFCO)’s Paradeep unit received a call from the Delhi corporate office informing him of a complaint filed by the wife of a deceased employee against a current employee of the unit. The complaint alleged that the employee had defrauded the widow of approximately US$40,000—the sum total of her husband’s terminal death benefit. As the joint general manager worked to investigate the matter and prepare a report for senior management, he found himself struggling with the managerial need to safeguard the organization’s image. As a human resources manager, he contemplated several questions: How could an ethical culture be established and sustained in IFFCO? What strategic human resources measures should be adopted to avoid such situations in future? How could communication be used as enabler in this critical situation? Despite his mixed emotions and the limited time available to present his findings, he knew that he needed to ensure a fair and thorough investigation to resolve the issue.
On April 12, 2018, the manager of a Philadelphia Starbucks Corporation (Starbucks) store called the police and two customers were arrested. The two men, who were black, were sitting at a table in the store without having placed an order. The incident sparked an online wave of protest over racial bias at Starbucks, a company that had long touted its social agenda of racial equity and diversity. The chief executive officer of Starbucks, quickly acknowledged the incident with a general public apology and a more specific follow-up statement later the same day. Amid outrage over the Philadelphia arrests and backlash online, the company also announced a half-day mass anti-racism training program for its employees. Experts were skeptical about the success of the training, claiming that a half-day training session could not eliminate racial bias. Was the company doing enough to train its front-line employees in providing not only the best service but also equal service to its customers? Did Starbucks truly represent the values it promoted? Would a half-day anti-racism training session effectively address the issue of racial bias, especially for front-line workers?