An online query on the definition of “injustice” returned many choices. For the purposes of what is needed, the following was quoted:
“the quality or fact of being unjust; inequity. 2. violation of the rights of others; unjust or unfair action or treatment. 3. an unjust or unfair act; wrong.”
The reason for have the quoted definition above is to provide the basis that injustice can be objectively identified as a rule being broken, but injustice is most often times a subjective occurrence of how one feels about what has just occurred to one’s self. It can be about one feeling slighted because another person got a closer seat to one’s friend at a gathering. It can be something overt and illegal as being told that a promotion went to someone else because that other person is of a particular race or gender or religion, which has no bearing on the promotion at hand.
If a person feels that an injustice has occurred to one’s self, that person needs to evaluate what happened, what the injustice is, and why does the person believe that it was an injustice. Yes, this is questioning one’s own motive. It is very important that a person do this to be sure that what occurred was actually an injustice, and not just a dent made to one’s own ego or sense of self importance.
With an injustice self-confirmed, the injured party must begin with a calm conversation with the injuring party about what went on and how the actions made the injured party feel. In the example of a lost promotion, ask about the shortcoming those who made the decision found, leading to the promoting of the other person. If the response is not satisfactory, to continue to pursue justice the injured party will have to escalate this issue.
In a business environment where the injuring party is one’s boss, taking the issue to the next as it were likely means escalation, and those relating the path to take state that this likely means another conversation and or a letter to one’s boss’s boss. The conversation and or the letter / email need to be informal, professional, respectful and courteous at all times. These guides say to present a list of reasons why one’s self would have been the better choice. Find out who the decision makers were. If one continues to be dissatisfied, the guides recommend writing a formal letter to the superiors of the decision makers, again listing why one’s self would have been the better choice. As a last resort, sue in court is the recommendation. But … one must understand that each of these steps is fraught with risk. One might gain what one felt was wrongly given to another, but one must weigh the cost of the win. The final result may be that the pursuit generated a very hostile environment, making it almost impossible to continue one’s career in that company or position. This would be seen as a Pyrrhic victory, one where the winning of the battle was at such a cost that it is impossible to continue on a win the war, that this one win has lost the war. A person must weigh the worth of such a potential cost.