At 9 pm on Saturday evening, Rashika, a Joint Secretary, was still engrossed in her work in her office.…

Question

At 9 pm on Saturday evening, Rashika, a Joint Secretary, was still engrossed in her work in her office. Her husband, Vikram, is an executive in an MNC and frequently out of town in connection with his work. Their two children aged 5 and 3 are looked after by their domestic helper. At 9:30 pm her superior, Mr. Suresh calls her and asks her to prepare a detailed note on an important matter to be discussed in a meeting in the Ministry. She realises that she will have to work on Sunday to finish the additional task given by her superior.

She reflects on how she had looked forward to this posting and had worked long hours for months to achieve it. She had kept the welfare of people uppermost in discharging her duties. She feels that she has not done enough justice to her family and she has not fulfilled her duties in discharging essential social obligations. Even as recently as last month she had to leave her sick child in the nanny's care as she had to work in the office. Now, she feels that she must draw a line, beyond which her personal life should take precedence over her professional responsibilities. She thinks that there should be reasonable limits to the work ethics such as punctuality, hard work, dedication to duty and selfless service.

(a) Discuss the ethical issues involved in this case.
(b) Briefly describe at least four laws that have been enacted by the Government with respect to providing a healthy, safe and equitable working environment for women.
(c) Imagine you are in a similar situation. What suggestions would you make to mitigate such working conditions?

Ghissu Editorial · Accepted Answer

Rashika's case pits Professional Duty against Family Welfare, worsened by a gendered care burden and an unempathetic superior. Laws such as the POSH Act 2013, the Maternity Benefit Amendment 2017, the Code on Wages 2019 and the OSH Code 2020 protect women at work.

**Introduction**

The core dilemma is between Professional Duty, Rashika's commitment to public welfare, and Family Welfare, her children's claim to a present parent.

**(a) Ethical Issues Involved in This Case**

1. **Work-life imbalance**: Constant weekend work turns dedication into excess, and burnout harms judgement.
2. **Gendered care burden**: Women spend 289 minutes a day on unpaid domestic work against 88 for men (Time Use Survey 2024).
3. **Leadership without empathy**: Mr. Suresh's late demand shows poor planning and low Emotional Intelligence.

**(b) Laws for a Healthy, Safe and Equitable Workplace for Women**

1. **POSH Act, 2013**: Following Vishaka (1997) [case], Internal Committees in offices with ten or more staff.
2. **Maternity Benefit (Amendment) Act, 2017**: 26 weeks' paid leave and creches for 50 or more employees.
3. **Code on Wages, 2019**: Equal pay for the same or similar work, carrying forward the 1976 Act.
4. **OSH Code, 2020**: Night shifts only with consent and safe transport.
5. **Child Care Leave**: Up to 730 days for women central government employees.

**(c) Suggestions to Mitigate Such Working Conditions**

SKETCH: venn | Professional Duty vs Family Welfare
a: Professional Duty
b: Family Welfare
overlap: Planned, shared, bounded work

1. **Dialogue and planning**: Finish the urgent note, then agree with Mr. Suresh on earlier briefs, and share drafting through the team and e-Office.
2. **Shared care**: Agree equal parenting with Vikram and use Child Care Leave when needed.
3. **Institutional reform**: Seek an office creche, flexible hours and Mission Karmayogi iGOT [scheme] training in humane team management.

**Justification:** Aristotle's Phronesis: dedication at its mean sustains service without sacrificing family.

**Conclusion**

Reasonable limits make selfless service lasting, so a civil servant who plans and shares serves both public and family better.

Model answer

Practise this question

Personal, Family and Social-Norm Dilemmas6 questions

Ghissu