PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to develop a conceptual framework that clarifies the construct of pay secrecy.Design/methodology/approachParalleling organizational justice research, two continua of pay information – a distributive continuum about pay raise outcomes and a procedural continuum of pay raise processes – are crossed to produce a 3 × 3 matrix with nine distinct forms of pay communication.FindingsDrawing on the substitutability effect from the organizational justice literature, the matrix highlights the importance of considering how the communication of different types of pay information interact with one another as individuals form pay perceptions.Research limitations/implicationsThe matrix framework illustrates that not only information content shapes pay perceptions, but also the extent to which different types of pay information are communicated, and how these different types of information interact. As with any conceptual framework, the current manuscript is limited by a lack of empirical testing.Practical implicationsManagers should be cognizant of the many different ways in which pay information can be communicated. A call is made to reconsider the use of traditionally binary terminology (secret or not) in favor of more accurate descriptions of the nuanced ways in which organizations communicate pay information.Originality/valueThe value of the pay communication matrix lies in the nine unique forms of pay communication arising from the interaction of two different forms of pay information – distributive (outcomes) and procedural (process).

No abstract

Theoretical basis Organizational Justice Theory serves as a useful frame for discussion of this case, focusing on perceptions of fairness in the workplace. Such perceptions are shaped by outcomes, procedures, information and interpersonal treatment. Perceptions of justice in these four dimensions are associated with job performance, citizenship behaviors and some mental health outcomes. The Exit, Voice, Loyalty, Neglect (EVLN) Model outlines four potential responses (exit, voice, loyalty and neglect) to perceived job dissatisfaction, serving as a useful framework for students to discuss potential employee reactions to Starbucks’ decisions. Research methodology This case was developed from secondary sources, including news reports, company annual reports and websites. The case has been classroom tested with undergraduate students in Principles of Management (online and face-to-face) Human Resource Management (online asynchronous) and Labor/Management Relations (online synchronous). Case overview/synopsis In June 2020, Starbucks became immersed in controversy when its dress code policy conflicted with its public support for national protests over police brutality against Black Americans, including the death of George Floyd while in police custody. While publicly supporting the protests in a series of tweets, an internal memo forbidding employees from wearing Black Lives Matter attire was leaked to the press, generating national outcry, threats of a boycott and forcing Starbucks to reverse course immediately. This case examines the benefits and challenges of a corporate dress/uniform policy, and the implications of corporate involvement in social justice issues. Complexity academic level This case can be used in a wide range of undergraduate and graduate courses, but particularly in Principles of Management and Human Resources courses.

Theoretical basis This case addresses stakeholder theory by asking students to consider the various entities that have a vested interest in Delta’s response to the passage of the Senate Bill (SB) 202. Stakeholder theory holds that businesses are responsible to broader constituents in society and not only to stockholders/shareholders or owners. This perspective suggests that businesses do not exist to maximize profit alone but also to enhance society in their day-to-day decisions. To this end, stakeholders are defined as entities that affect or are affected by an organization’s decisions. Stakeholder theory is based on three arguments: descriptive, instrumental and normative arguments. Research methodology The information presented in the case was sourced from secondary sources, including both company and media publications. Several media sources from a breadth of political orientations were used to capture the complexity of the issue and the decision at hand. The case development and premise started at the Eastern Academy of Management 2021 Annual Conference Case Hackathon. The case was piloted by eight students (seven undergraduates, one graduate student) in two different courses at two institutions. The student feedback helped to highlight where clarifications were needed within the case and resulted in modifications to the exhibits, appendices and discussion questions. Case overview/synopsis On March 26, 2021, the media was buzzing about the passage of the Georgia SB 202, which included voting regulations perceived to negatively target black voters. As the head of the state’s largest employer, Delta Airlines’ Chief Executive Officer Edward Bastian found himself at the center of a heated political issue. While Delta had initially shown support for the bill, the rise in opposing voices and pressure to boycott Delta presented increasing pressure to think about its various stakeholders and potentially reevaluate the company’s handling of the situation. Should Bastiasn stay consistent with Delta’s initial support of SB 202, speak out to oppose it or remain silent? Complexity academic level Undergraduate students within business ethics or business in society courses are the best audiences for the case. The case may also be used in courses that have a portion of their content on business ethics or business in society; these related courses with subsections, modules or themes in this area may include corporate strategy, social responsibility and political activism.