Q: I am a member of a nonprofit benevolent organization. I am considering proposing that we give the homeless cardboard boxes — big enough for a person to sleep in, heavily waxed and hence weatherproof. For the cost of helping 100 people with our traditional programs, we could help 1,000 with these boxes. Is this an ethical project? — Tom Hopkins, Vail
A: Your proposal is disturbing in that it vividly evokes, abets and thus, in a sense, endorses homeless people sleeping in cardboard boxes, albeit boxes of superior design. But your project is not unethical. Indeed, to the extent that it would relieve human misery, it is estimable.
Immediate needs must be met, of course, and it is better to do a little than to do nothing, but those are not your only alternatives. Your organization might more effectively devote its money and time not just to mitigating present hardship but also to addressing its causes.
Update: Hopkins’ idea didn’t get anywhere. “There was not a lot of excitement” about it, he said.
Q: The board of our 273-unit co-op wants to replace our union cleaning service with a nonunion service to save $35,000 a year, although the board acknowledges that our present service performs admirably. Facing rising costs, the board stresses its duty to stay within its budget and hold down monthly fees. Is the board acting ethically? What can residents do if they disagree with it? — Joan Greenfield, Boston
A: The board’s proposal is a dubious first step. It should instead begin by negotiating with the current service, seeking to preserve good union jobs without busting your building’s budget. Dissenting tenants should express their willingness to pay a bit more rather than squeeze the cleaning crew. It would cost each unit only $10.68 a month to make up that $35,000 — about 36 cents a day.
To dump union workers often means saving money by denying their replacements health insurance, vacation and pension benefits, not to mention decent pay. New employees are not more productive; they can just be induced to work for less — economic desperation has a way of doing that. While the board has financial obligations to the co-op owners, it also should treat its employees fairly rather than force them into a race to the bottom.
Update: The board replaced its unionized service with nonunion workers. The union company found jobs in other buildings for the original crew, but not full-time work.
Write to Randy Cohen at Universal Press Syndicate, 4520 Main St., Kansas City, MO 64111, or ethicist@nytimes.com.
