As the swine flu continues to creep up in many homes, schools, workplaces and public areas throughout our nation, people are starting to fret about securing an H1N1 shot before they run out. To make matters worse, there is a new controversy on who qualifies as “high risk.”

According to one article, criminals who are getting first dibs on the shots are undeserving of such a healthful cause; “there is something very wrong with a government who would care for convicted criminals before hard-working taxpayers.”

To some law-abiding citizens of this nation, losing the potential to receive the shot for their kids or themselves to a prisoner, is unfair. Yet, The Centers For Disease Control disagree wholeheartedly:

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention issued guidelines to states listing categories of people who are highest priority for receiving vaccinations against the virulent influenza strain known as swine flu. Christopher Cox, spokesman for the CDC, said the high priority guidance applies to higher-risk people whether they are in a prison, a homeless shelter, a school or a nursing home.

Spokesman Cox defends the overall decision stating, “what we’re looking at is vulnerability to getting sick and dying of H1N1. That’s what we’re trying to prevent.”

As controversial as this subject may be, the truth of the matter is, there’s no right answer. For those individuals desperate for flu shots for their kids or themselves, their argument cannot be disputed. Yet, to deny certain citizens the right to protect themselves from the flu simply because of their past behavior, also seems unjust. Bottom line, with every situation that involves satisfying the expectations of two opposing positions, an impasse usually forms. And although workplace controversies are rarely a matter of life or death, its important to remember that all sides have ownership in their stance.

The essential path to keep in mind when dealing with seemingly unresolvable rifts between stakeholders, is that arguments are heard and acknowledged. A compromise may not be easily discovered, but airing frustrations in a constructive manner may help stakeholders recognize each others point of view.

As the Methodology Blog has covered before, friction between stakeholders is not detrimental so long as it sparks useful conversation that leads to growth rather than stagnation. If your company is wedged between opposing points of view and wishes to bring satisfaction to all parties involved, contact Slaughter Development today. Our Workplace Diagnostics program will not only assist in discovering the sources of controversy, but will simultaneously identify solutions that bring about new and innovative outlets.

❖ ❖ ❖