Both firms offered to cover her "out-of-pocket expenses" (travel, hotel, and meals). she scheduled the interviews for both firms on the same day, one in the morning and one in the afternoon. at the conclusion of each interview, she submitted to both firms her total out-of-pocket expenses of $296 for mileage, hotel, meals, parking and tolls. she believes this approach is appropriate. if she had made two trips, her cost would have been two times $296. she is also certain that neither firm knew she had visited the other on that same trip. within ten days alex received two checks in the mail, each in the amount of $296. did alex handle the situation properly? if not what should she have done?

The correct answer to this situation is the following.

Well, here we are facing an ethical dilemma. Alex thought that she "played her cards" optimally and benefited from the situation. The companies acted in "goodwill" and pay as promised all the expenses when they both sent the checks a weel later.  But that is not the kind of conduct that is expected from an ethical professional. She is cheating in order to get money from the companies.

What she should have done is be honest and candidly express the real situation. That should have shown that she is a person of high values that respects the hard-earned money of the company and that she always acts with class, being honest and open.

eds? ederal government or feds