Founding Fathers Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin free essay sample

Founding Fathers Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin are frequently regarded to be two of the most influential figures in early American history. Both men contributed greatly to the founding of the nation and are considered to be two of the forefathers of the new country. While there are great similarities in both their public and political lives as well as within their personal lives. Even with the uncanny similarities with these two men, there are also slight differences as be expected of two different men.However, while their histories Intertwine a great deal and there are many historical roughhouses that the figures share, It is what they do not that Is of greatest interest. This is because each man brought a different set of understanding and skills to the nation. While both were great men and offered tremendous services to the country Individually, it is clear that the United States would be severely hurt without the contributions of both. We will write a custom essay sample on Founding Fathers Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page Thomas Jefferson is perhaps best known for being the primary author of the Declaration of Independence. He specifically coined the first lines of the second paragraph which laid the foundation for the American Revolution and American necromancy: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their Just powers from the consent of the governed, -That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it Is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish It, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its rowers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Benjamin Franklin, however, led a very different role with regards to the Declaration of Independe nce.In 1775, upon his arrival to Philadelphia, he was chosen as a member of the Continental Congress and assisted in editing the document that had already been forged. However, it is Franklins earlier life that contributed much to the birth of the united States. For most of Franklins early life, he worked as a businessman having started a printing house in 1730 and initiated he Union Fire Company, the first volunteer firefighting company in America, in 1736. In 1748, he retired from printing and created a partnership with his foreman, David Hill, who provided Franklin with half the shops profits for the next 18 years.This business was very lucrative and afforded Franklin the ability for leisure time and study and yielded many of his discoveries that made him famous through Europe and much of France. Of his investigations was his look into electricity, including his Lune 15, 1752 famous kite flight In lightning to test the reactions of electricity. However, Franklin understood the dangers of electricity ? as evident by his later invention of the lightning rod and properly insulated himself before the attempt in 1 OFF major fields of science: electricity and meteorology.In politics he proved very able both as an administrator and as a contro versialists; as an office-holder, he made use of his position to advance his relatives, though doing so was all but expected in a world dominated by political patronage. His most notable service in domestic politics was his reform of the postal system, but his fame s a statesman rests chiefly on his diplomatic services in connection with the relations of the colonies with Great Britain, and later with France. It was during this period that Franklin was involved in the creation of not only the aforementioned first volunteer fire department and free public library, but also many other civic enterprises. In 1754 he headed the Pennsylvania delegation to the Albany Congress. This meeting of several colonies had been requested by the Board of Trade in England to improve relations with the Indians and defense against the French. Franklin proposed a broad Plan of Union for the colonies. While the plan was not adopted, elements of it found their way into the Articles of Confederation and the Constitution.In 1757 he was sent to England to protest against the influence of the Penn family in the government of Pennsylvania, and for five years he remained there, striving to enlighten the people and the ministry of the United Kingdom as to colonial conditions. At Oxford University Franklin was awarded an honorary doctorate for his scientific accomplishments and from then on went by Doctor Franklin. He also managed to secure a post for his illegitimate son, William Franklin, as Colonial Governor of New Jersey.In 1756, Franklin became a member of the Society for the encouragement of Arts, Manufactures Commerce whose early meetings took place in coffee shops in Loons Covent Garden district, close to Franklins main London residence in Craven Street. After his return to America, Franklin became the Societys Corresponding Member and remained closely connected with the Society. The RASA instituted a Benjamin Franklin Medal in 1956 to commemorate the 20th anniversary of Franklins birth and the 20th anniversary of his membership of the RASA.In 1758, he year in which he ceased writing for the Almanac, he printed Father Abrahams Sermon, one of the most famous pieces of literature produced in Colonial America. Jefferson early political history seems to stem from entirely different roots than did Franklins. Ata young age, Jefferson inherited about 5,000 acres of land and dozens of slaves from his father, out of which he created his home which would eventually be known as Monticello. He practiced law in Virginia and in 1772 Jefferson married a widow, Martha Walleyes Skeleton. Jefferson served in the Virginia House of Burgesses.In 1774, he wrote A Summary View of the Rights of British America which was intended as instructions for the Virginia delegates to a national congress. The summary was considered to be towards the radical side at the time in terms of the view of the colonies towards the British government. It was not followed by the Virginia delegates, but it was published nationally and won Jefferson some national admirers who agreed with his ideas and who were impressed by his writing ability. Jefferson was the primary author of the Declaration of Independence, and a source of many there contributions to American political and civil culture.The Continental Congress delegated the task of writing the Declaration to a committee which included Jefferson, John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Roger Sherman, and Robert R. Livingston. The Declaration alone. In his public life and on matters of religion, Jefferson was sometimes accused by his political opponents of being an atheist; however, he is generally regarded as a believer in Deism, a philosophy shared by many other notable intellectuals of his time (in contrast with Franklin who rebelled quite readily against his parents Christian teachings).Jefferson repeatedly stated his belief in a creator, and in the United States Declaration of Independence uses the terms Creator, Natures God, and Divine Providence. Jefferson believed, furthermore, it was this Creator that endowed humanity with a number of inalienable rights, such as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. He was raised Episcopalian at a time when the Episcopal Church was the state religion in Virginia. Before the American Revolution, when the Episcopal Church was the American branch of the AnglicanChurch of England, Jefferson was a vestryman in his local church, a lay position that w as part of political office at the time. He later removed his name from those available to become godparents, because his beliefs opposed Trinitarian theology. Jefferson later expressed general agreement with his friend Joseph Priestley Unitarianism and wrote that he would have liked to have been a member of a Unitarian church, but there were no Unitarian churches in Virginia. While it may seem that Franklin and Jefferson shared different roots, their differences in religion loud be made up for with similarities in religious philosophy.Both men supported what Jefferson called a wall of separation between Church and State, which he believed was a principle expressed within the First Amendment: Because religious belief, or non-belief, is such an important part of every persons life, freedom of religion affects every individual. State churches that use government power to support themselves and force their views on persons of other faiths undermine all our civil rights. Moreover, state support of the church tends to make he c lergy unresponsive to the people and leads to corruption within religion.Erecting the wall of separation between church and state, therefore, is absolutely essential in a free society. This particular point about the two founding fathers is of note, as it is representative of a number of their other political philosophies. As can be seen from the above paragraphs, the early personal and political lives of Franklin and Jefferson differed greatly, especially in the areas of their upbringing. Contrast Jefferson early wealth with the fact that Franklins early life yielded birth in Boston, Massachusetts on January 17, 1706.Rather than being born to a wealthy landowner, Franklins father, Josiah Franklin, was a tallow chandler, a maker of candles, who married twice. Franklin also was one of seventeen children and was the tenth and youngest son. His schooling ended at ten and at 12 he became an apprentice to his brother James, a printer who published the New England Currant. And while Franklins early printing life was of interest: while a printing apprentice he wrote under the pseudonym of Silence Dogwood who was ostensibly a middle-aged widow. His brother and the Currants readers did not initially know the real author.His brother was not impressed when he discovered his popular correspondent was his younger, precocious brother. He left his apprenticeship without permission and in so doing became a fugitive. After this, Franklin did not really see wealth or success until he became self-made through his printing companies. So it is these a hand in shaping the nation, especially in their work on the Declaration of Independence, and believed very similar philosophies with regards to individual freedoms, political agendas, and religious practices.

Part-Time Workers

Part-Time Workers Review Theoretical Concept of Organizational Commitment The organizational commitment as a concept is extremely popular today especially in the organizational and industrial psychology. A good proportion of the studies done in the past on this subject gave the concept an attitudinal perspective, including such aspects as being ready to identify with and be loyal to the organization for which one works. The concept of attitudinal perspective has been defined as the employees effective commitment in relation to the way, in which he or she is identified and involved in the organization, for which he or she is working. Organizational commitment is also indicated by such aspects as the intention to remaining in it, internalizing and identifying with the organizational goals and values, and finally, how much one is willing to put an extra effort for the benefit of the organization. Commitment, therefore, provides a strong linkage between the employees as such and their respective organization. According to side bet theory, individual employees are only committed to the organization whenever their positions in the organizations are still intact. The theory emphasizes that the employees level of commitment is not influenced by the experience through which they are going. On the other hand, Porter and Steer, while supporting the theory, described organizational commitment as behaviour in which the organization can lock their employees. According to Conway and Briner, there are a few researches that have been done on the topic of the differences in commitment between part time employees and full time employees. However, they note that even with the many studies, there has never been any empirical study done with the main objective on the establishment of the extent and reasons behind the difference in the level of commitment between the two groups of employees. The few studies, which have been done, have combined the relationship between commitments and satisfaction with the status of work. An example of such finding is a study conducted by McGinnis and Morrow and the findings published in 1990. Conway and Briner have identified a number of scholars who have carried out research on this topic. However, they note a high level of inconsistencies in their findings. For example, studies by both Martin and Peterson in 1987 found part time workers to be more committed, while that by Lee and Johnson carried out in 1991 found out that the part time employees were less committed. On the other hand, another study by Krausz in 2000 found out that both groups of employees showed the same level of commitment towards their work. Most of these past studies are majorly criticized because of their being theoretically designed. This has made their findings presented in the form of clear differences, which are empirical in nature, in general terms. Conway and Briner note that little efforts were put by the past researchers in trying to explain the difference between the two groups. In cases where attempts to come up with the explanations were made, the researchers employed the partial inclusion and frame of reference theories, which only included part time employees partially. The argument has been that such employees spend only a small fraction of the time in their work stations, while most of their time they spend in other activities away from the organization. It is thus clear that these theories have not given part-time employees equal treatment. For example, the theory of frame of reference categorizes part time employees as having a different reference frame from the one applicable to full time employees. This notion arose in line with the belief that during comparison, part time employees will evaluate their jobs based on different groups and environmental aspects from the aspects used by those employed on a full time basis. An example has been the finding that part time employees normally put more consideration on how flexible their job is than full time employees. All these theories have, therefore, been employed in the study in a way in which they contradict one another in their explanation of the differences in the level of employees commitment and other related factors such as job satisfaction. For instance, being poor in the way one socialize has been used to judge certain employees as not being committed to their work. According to Conway and Briner, such inferences have been based on that both the partial inclusion theory and the frames of reference theory are easy to be manipulated by any researcher in their explanation of any findings concluded empirically. They further note that all the two theories have never been empirically tested, and that based on the fact that they are both not well elaborated, the mode in which they are to be operated is not clearly defined. According to them, this is the reason as to why there has been little understanding of the reasons behind the low level of commitment among part time employees and any othe r aspect related to them. Other Factors Causing the Difference in the Employees Level of Commitment Conway and Briner reported a study, in which psychological framework was used as the basis, so as to understand the reasons why those who are not employed on a full time basis are not as committed as those who are employed on a full time basis. They defined their concept as the beliefs of individuals and noted that it is normally shaped by the agreement, which an organization signs with its employees. That means it has to do with how these employees perceive the promises that they receive from the organization for which they work. Such believes, normally, make the employees have an expectation of appreciations in terms of inducements in return to the contributions they make to the company. The psychological contract has thus been viewed as a framework that can be used to explain the relationship between employers and employees which, in turn, has a significant effect on the level to which the employees will be committed to their work. According to Conway and Briner, this concept can best be applicable so as to explain the behaviours and attitudes of the employees towards their employers. This can be done based on the contents of the negotiation and how the process of negotiation itself is carried out in a certain organization. Commitment and Attitudes Conway and Briner note studies have revealed that there is a relationship between psychological contract and attitudinal differences experienced at the various workplaces. According to them, these factors affect all the employees irrespective of whether they are employed on a full time or part time basis. However, in depth analysis has revealed that those employed on a full time basis differs from those employed on a part time basis on several attitudes, which affect the level of their commitment. This means that the level of psychological contract fulfilment, which one receives, can be used to explain their attitudes, which are useful in understanding their level of commitment. The breach or fulfilment of this contract is what determines whether an employee will be committed to the organization or not. Research has shown that, in a case where the organization is keen to honour the psychological contract, the employees always exhibit a high level of fulfilment and, thus, commitment to the organization. In such a situation, the employees will not be willing to quit the organization. It is, therefore, clear that the concept of psychological contract could be particularly applicable in explaining the behaviours and attitudes that are common with employees. According to Conway and Briner, this concept is applicable even in the explanation of the behaviours of contingent employees, provided the variety of employment contract is known. Conway and Briner identified a number of reasons why part-time employees psychological contract would be different from that of the employees employed on a permanent basis. Such differences may be caused by the disparities in the promises made to each of these two groups. Normally, the extent to which this psychological contract is fulfilled differ, which is based on reasons emanating from the differences at the level of the organization, interpersonal, individual, and those related to the fact that some employees spend less time at their station of work. At the level of the organization, studies have revealed that most of the organizations treat their part-time employees in a different manner from the way in which they treat their full-time counterparts. Their contract and its fulfilment thereof are normally based on the amount and nature of work they undertake, the advancement opportunity, the benefit coverage, and the autonomy. Giving example, Conway and Briner (281) note that most of the organizations do not usually offer the same opportunities for promotion and training to the part time employees as that which they give to the full-time employees. Equally, some organizations only hire the part timers to help them whenever they are overwhelmed. They thus use them to achieve their own motives. This is likely to affect the level of commitment that an employee will have towards the organization for which he works. According to Birkelund, it is because of the difference in their career orientations, that some part timers are loosely committed to the organizations for which they work. However, she notes that some part time employees have simply not been so much committed to their places of work because of the intension of enjoying the flexibility that comes with working on a part time basis. Such employees need more time to attend other commitments that they may have outside the official assignments from the organization. This is contrary to the permanent employees who, on the other hand, have high expectations from the organizations for which they work, making them especially committed to them. Such employees normally have higher expectations of benefiting from the organization, both on short and long-term basis. Interpersonal level normally concerns with the way in which workers are treated either by their fellow workers or their supervisors. These may include practices that are understood to be illegal like stereotypes, which may also affect the level of commitment an employee may be showing towards the organization. Finally, because they are only available at the organization for a short time, the organizations may not offer part time employees more promises as is done to other employees. In fact, in many cases, some employees are not even well conversant with the promises the company has for them. This may lead such problems as related to poor communication between the employees and the organization with lack of commitment being one of them. Birkelund has noted that irrespective of the fact that the level of significance of the part time work has grown, organizations have continued to construct it negatively. This explains why many organizations have continued to exploit their employees. She warns that there is a need to shift the theoretical representation of both the part time employees and part time work. She notes that the growth of significance of part time work should be taken positively as a pluralistic, arrangement of career, and equitable work. She notes the tendency for people in the developed nations like the US and the UK to associate part time work with penalties such as inadequate benefit. She observes that the HR of many leading organizations within the developed world normally associate part time work with low wages, higher percentage workers with low skilled and low level of commitment, lack of job security, and finally lack of enough opportunities for career development. She notes the tendency of sociologists to portray part time work as secondary work while at the same time such concepts as a new subclass of workers have been used to describe those who are working on a part time basis. He also mentioned the claim by scholars like Cathrine Hakin who had argued that women who presented themselves in Europes labour market were either self made or grateful slaves. The diffidence between the two categories, according to her, depends on the level of commitment of these women to their work. Describing her concept of grateful slaves, Birkelund notes that Hakin had argued that such women who work on a part time basis in the occupations dominated by women, especially those with low pay, are normally lowly committed to their work. She, however, emphasized that the notion of viewing all part time job as disadvantageous is not correct. According to her, such claims do not have their grounds and, therefore, only works to influence the commitment of those who are seeking to render their services on a part time basis. According to her observation, various nations and organizations have improved the commitment of their part time employees by presenting cogent formulated agreements. He notes that whenever the part time workers are presented with proportionate wages and reasonable benefits, they normally show a high level of commitment just like their colleagues employed on a permanent basis. Equally, research has shown that those part time workers who are included in viable career paths have shown significant level of commitment. Birkelund urges that countries and organizations need to integrate part time work with the policies guiding the operation of the work place. She observed that this is already happening in the majority of the European countries where the part time jobs is already being supplied as a standard work. Those working on a part time basis in these nations, therefore, enjoy reduced working hours, proportionate benefits and wages as well as full protection of their employment. She argued that this could be the reasons behind the findings that there is a high level of commitment among the part timers in the European nations, in comparison to the c ases with the US countries. It is thus clear that there are a number of other factors besides an employee being a full time or part time employee, which affects the level to which an employee will be committed to his work irrespective of whether they work on a part time or full time basis. In summary, the factors include the incorporation of part time work as a standard form of employment within the organizational policy, opportunities for career progression, benefit coverage and equitable remuneration among other kinds of social protection offered by the organizations (Birkelund, 11). Methodology In its philosophical approach, the study employed a mixture of critical realism and interpretivism. This was based on the understanding that it is almost impossible to have a research question in this study addressed entirely by the philosophical approach. The critical realism fits the study, since there are general assumptions that have been made regarding the relationship between the commitment of part time workers and their commitment in the work place. However, because the reason behind such an allegation is not yet established, there would be a need for an independent study involving all he stakeholders to help ascertain the claim. An interpretive would, therefore, help in establishing clear links between these variables. This means that the study would be able to find out and explain the reasons for the connections between part time workers and the allegations put against them. The study also takes into account the additional factors that affect the commitment of workers like the conditions the workers are subjected to and terms of employment. Such concepts are normally understood via interpretive means. This was made possible, since the approach makes an assumption that the reality cannot always be observed and is, therefore, determined by the relationship between the employer, especially the HR and the part time and full time workers. The study employed a mixture of deductive and inductive approaches. This enabled to test the existing arguments derived from the theory of the frame of reference and that of partial inclusion. The research was also based on the already known facts and the experiences of the researcher both in management and the applied, conceptual model. However, to enable the researcher succeed in generating new knowledge on the topic, the study employed the use of semi-structured interview, which is understood as being more inductive. On the strategy of the research, the study employed the use of a case study. This enabled the researcher to obtain and present holistic findings on the subject, in question. The strategy, for example, allowed a research around people, structures, and even policies. This means that the study is likely to succeed in demonstrating how the commitment of employees can be affected or complemented through the provision of favourable terms. This was made possible through employing the use of semi-structured interviews. The method was complimented by the use of the qualitative questionnaire. The two methods were considered viable since they would also help the researcher to save time, hence, enabling working within the budgeted time frame. The one on one interview was also conducted with a number of the relevant HR specialist. Overall, the two methods helped the researcher to have a better understanding of perspectives and views of the part time employees, full time employees and those of the HR managers towards difference in the level of commitments between the two categories of employees. This way, the researcher was be able to know whether the claims that part time employees are less committed to their work than the full time employees is anything to go by or mere claims having understood the conditions under which the part time employees work. This also allowed the researcher to make appropriate recommendations and conclusions which will not only be helpful to Hilton International Hotel but the entire HR profession. The case study was a holistic two cases study with two branches of the Hilton International Hotel which were the units of analysis within the United Kingdom. Thus, the research considered 100 employees with 50 employees being selected from each hotel. Out of the 50, 25 were part time employees with the other 25 full time employees. That means that each of the two hotels had 25 of their full time employees and 25 of their part time employees participating in the research. Stratified sampling method was used in selecting the participants. This enabled the employees from the two organizations to be divided into either full time or part time employee groups. After coming up with the two groups, the 25 representatives from each group were then chosen, based the on random sampling method to give each member the same probability of being considered. The use of case study enabled the researcher to carry out the study from a number of stakeholder perspectives. This means that besides interviewing the HR specialists under which the issues affecting the employees directly lies, the senior manager who is viewed to have a knowledge and influence on the formulation of the organizational policies was also interviewed on the one on one basis. The study also considered probing part time employees, so as to find out additional reasons why they would be less committed to their work places. It is also worth noting that considering two different branches enabled the researcher to compare the findings obtained from different cases. This may give additional insights like the possibility of the attitudes of the part time employees being determined by circumstances surrounding their work. Choice and Limitations of the Research Methods It is, therefore, obvious that this study employed the use of four methods. First, the semi-structured interviews, which were used to conduct the focus group study with both the full time employees and the part time employees from the two hotels. Second was the one on one interview, which helped in obtaining information from both the HR manager dealing directly with the issues of employees and the senior HR managers of the selected branches. There was also an extensive review of the job descriptions of both the part time employees and the full time employees. Finally, the study considered reviewing the organizational and the national, corporate HR documents. Of much interest were the documented policies, systems, and structures governing the relationship between the part time employees and their employers. This enabled the researcher to get insights on the conditions under which both the full time employees and the part time employees work. The semi-structured interview was chosen because it allows the researcher to seek clarifications from the interviewee. The focus group was also considered since it would enable the participants to discuss freely giving close insights about the topic of discussion. On the other hand, the one on one interview with senior HR managers and the HR managers helped give more insights on what was already known about the topic and the answers obtained from the focus group discussions with the full time employees and the part time employees. The only limitation, which could be common to these methods, would be the researcher taking more time than was allocated in the timetable. However, these methods were, therefore, highly appropriate for this research. Data Analysis and Ethical Issues The participants who were interviewed had no problem with having the researcher jotting short hand notes on the issues that they discussed. In addition, the researcher sought the permission of the participants to have the proceedings recorded. More attention was paid on the sections of the interview that were essential for answering the research questions which he transcribed. This enabled the researcher to have easy task during the data analysis considering that he transferred all the data and stored them safely in a personal computer. He then erased the data from the temporary storage digital device as was agreed with the participants. Concerning the ethical considerations, the researcher secured permissions from the management of the two hotels and that of the participants long before the actual study. Moreover, the participants voices were only recorded only after their consent was secured.