OnlineBookClub.org

In a business fathers always want their sons to take over. So it didn’t matter what he did his father was never going to fire him.

I believe there should be a line drawn between family relations and business relations. Firing one's son may appear to be extreme, but if it is the required course of action, then there should be no favoritism.

I am taking sides with Mr. Wilkinson. The son recognized his fault and apologized. Firing him will be meaningless.

I can't take any sides here because I don't think anyone is at fault. Business and family, right from the onset, do not go along together. Me Wilkinson should have fired his son by normal work protocols but since Junior already owned to his mistakes. There's no need to fire him any longer.

It reeked of sentiment and cleverly asked nepotism to me. I do not agree with Mr Wilkonson at all. His son ought to have been fired.

I am siding with Mr Wilkinson. His son made a mistake, owned up to it and apologised. He commented out of ignorance. I am sure he wouldn't have made that comment if he knew the problems it would have caused.

One of the most difficult aspects of business is dealing with family members, especially when they make a mistake. I do believe that Mr. Wilkinson ought to have terminated Junior as a sign of good faith and as a means to make amends.

Although, his father had every right to fire him, business dealings involving family are usually very complicated. But from an objective stance, his actions warrant a sack.

Naturally, I'm siding with Mr. Wilkinson. However, I believed he ought to have dismissed and removed his son for the error. However, I believe Mr. Wilkinson gave it some thinking and decided against firing his son.