2-What ethical principles are at stake in this situation ?Rights ?Justice?Caring?Others?
The ethical principles that are at stake in this situation are the organization ethic because the friend felt that she would be better off in a different job and by doing that she took herself away from the organization to work for another one. Another ethic principle that was used in this situation is the conventionalist ethic, because the friend is acting to further her self-interest by putting her two week notice and finding another job that is better for herself. Lastly, another principle that was used in this situation was the intuition principle, this takes part when the manager asks the worker whether she knew that other worker was going to leave; this would be a moral situation where she has do what feels right based on her situation.
3-What should the person who faces this ethical situation do?
The manager has the right to approach an employer and question some issues, although in this case I believe the employee had the right not to say anything because there is a two- weeks’ notice policy. That is enough time to find another person for the position. The best way is to contact the employee directly instead of asking other employees.
Chapter 9 text : Bosses watching employees : Are you safe on social networking sites (Page 283)
- Do employees have right to free speech while not at work ? Do they have a right to not be monitored by their employers when they are “off the job”? Is this an ethical issue as well as a legal issue ?
I do think that employees have the right to speech while not at work because once you are not on the clock or not at work you are entitled to say what you want and express your opinion. I think that employees have the right not to be monitored by their employers when they are off the clock however; social networks are public so technically an employer can be monitor whenever. I think this issue is both ethical and legal because people want their right to privacy and therefore they would not want their employer to be monitoring them. But since social networks are public employers can monitor employees
- Should employees have the right to criticize their employer and managers on a social networking site? Are they violating any ethical duties they owe their employers?
People have the right to express their feelings but, when it comes down to criticizing your employer and managers on a social networks it is unprofessional because now you are giving the company you work for a bad name and that can potentially make you lose your job because a company isn’t going to want an employee who speaks negatively about their company. They are violating ethical duties that they owe to their employers such as the disclosure rule, the golden rule, the professional ethic, and the organizational ethic.
- Assuming the managers came across an incident such as that described ,What actions , If any , should they take ? What ethical principles should guide their actions ?
When it comes to situations such as employees having differences with a coworker and giving out negative information, it is up to the company and their policy. It is very difficult to not suffer any consequences for the actions being made and most people will make sure they are consequences.
CHAPTER 10 – TEXT : I Love My Job – Just Don’t Ask How I Got It! – Text (P. 320)
1- Is it ethical to give or take bribes just because practice in one’s country?
I think that it is very unethical and morally wrong to give or take bribes in general. I certainly believe that no one should ever compromise with their personal beliefs and values to fulfill their own selfish motives even if it is an accepted practice in one’s country . Bribery creates disrespect for institutions of government and incentives to dishonesty and other fraud. Bribery also creates a lawless environment that brings out the worst in people who practice it. As a goal, we should seek to eliminate bribery. Therefore, one should always take a stand for honesty, morality, and ethics because giving or accepting bribes create corrupt individuals and countries.
2- If bribery is an accepted practice, why did the friends want to keep this quiet?
I believe that the friend wanted to keep this bribery a secret because she was afraid that if people gained knowledge about this information then it would bring disgrace to her family and harm her family’s reputation. Although, bribing is accepted in her country, but not out in the open implies the fact that people would still feel embarrassed and guilty if they commit to this practice. That is because some people in the society would consider giving or taking bribes as unethical and morally wrong. Therefore, bribes should never be accepted because they create dependence on corrupt individuals and countries.
3- Should employees be hired on the basis of merit or according to how much they can bribe to secure a job?
To begin with, bribes are inherently wrong and should never be accepted under any circumstances. In this case, managers should not comprise with their own beliefs and values by accepting bribes to receive profits for their business . It would be very unethical and unprofessional to hire someone based on how much they can bribe because other candidates would not receive equal opportunity when they apply for the job . In doing so, the company may be losing a great opportunity to hire someone who is well-qualified and adequate for the job . Hence, an employee should never be hired according to how much they can bribe to secure a job within a company. It would be best for a company to hire a candidate only if he or she is capable of performing the tasks and fulfills the qualifications that the position requires. That is because an employee is the company’s greatest asset and it would be beneficial for the company to hire someone who is competent and knowledgeable to perform the position efficiently. Therefore, it would only be fair if managers hire employees on the basis of their experience and qualifications that have been set by the company and are suitable for the position rather than accepting bribes to seek profits for themselves.
CHAPTER 12 – TEXT : Patriotism VS. Profits: What Should a Firm Do? – Text (P. 386)
1- Who are the stakeholders and how are they affected by Walmart’s cost-saving strategy? Are Walmart’s actions in trying to minimize income tax payments in any possible way socially responsible?
The stakeholders are the customers, stockholders, employees, competitors, the community, suppliers, society, special-interest groups, general public, and the media. They are affected by Walmart’s cost-saving strategy because stakeholders have a multitude of interests, expectations, and demands as to what Walmart should provide to accommodate people’s life and lifestyles. I think that social responsibility can play a part in Walmart’s actions in trying to minimize income tax payments in any possible way because depending if they have a social goals or not it can deem to be in the public interest although that in end it can hurt the public as well
2- Do companies have a responsibility to pay a fair share of income tax to state and federal governments? Who determines what that fair share should be?
Companies definitely have the responsibility to pay a far share of income tax and federal governments. Like everyone else who has the responsibility to pay income taxes, businesses are equally responsible to pay their income tax payments as well. The Congress determines what the fair share of taxes should be for companies.
4- After receiving the bulk of U.S. Government contracts to fight the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, Halliburton relocated its operations to Dubai, a haven from U.S. Taxes. Senator Leahy described this move as “the wickedest of entrepreneurial greed.” Do you agree, or do you find the move acceptable?
I agree that Halliburton’s decision to relocate overseas to avoid taxes after being compensated so well by government contracts could be viewed as a form of greed. Halliburton as a entity, is only going to do what is in their best interest. Receiving and profiting from government contracts does not imply an obligation to the company to continue to pay annual taxes. I think the move is acceptable. There are no laws that restrict a company from locating and Halliburton is free to move as they please. Maybe this could be a sign to state and federal governments that they might want to evaluate what a better corporate acceptable fair share of income tax should be so they don’t continue to persuade large corporations to relocate overseas to avoid taxes.
5.-Although Eron paid no taxes in 2002, they received a $278 million tax rebate on a tax break from stock options cashed in by employees. The study also found that Enron paid no taxes in four of the five years from 1996 to 2000, during which time the company collected $381 million in tax refunds. Is this socially responsible behavior?
Enron’s actions are far from being considered socially responsibility behavior. Like every other corporation, Enron has the responsibility to pay its annual income taxes. Enron has committed to very unethical behavior and their corruption has affected many people who had invested in the corporation without looking at how negatively it would impact the society in the long-term. Every company should be required to pay the annual taxes especially if the corporation is making profits.
7- What implications do these situations hold for industrial policy? What would you do if you were a CEO of one of these corporations? What changes would you make, if any, if you were a government official? Are there lines that corporations should not cross? If so, what are they?
The implications that these situations hold for industrial policy are that there definitely needs to be regulations because people will find loopholes in the system and use them. That is why it is necessary to enforce the regulations so we can prevent unethical behavior from happening. If I were a CEO of the one of these corporations I would follow laws, regulations, and ethical behavior in order to have a successful business because if I were not to follow laws, regulation, or ethical behavior eventually the business will fall apart. If I were a government official I would probably enforce the regulations more to prevent situations like the one mentioned from happening. I think that there is lines that corporation shouldn’t cross like not paying their taxes, or potentially doing something that might affect its stockholders and society because if the line is crossed the business might end up having a negative image to its stockholders and society.
CHAPTER 13 – TEXT : The “Lifetime” of a Backpack – Text (P. 412)
1- Is the “lifetime guarantee” deceptive advertising?
I do think that the “lifetime warranty” that the company offers could be viewed as deceptive advertising by their customers. Although the warranty specifications are clearly stated on the website many people overlook this information and make assumptions of what they expect it to mean. This sporting goods store must use good judgement on when and when not to bring up the fine print details of the warranty during a sale, but many customers will appreciate the information up front. Warranties are meant to support customers that purchased products that have broken unexpectedly throughout the normal usage of the product. If the product, such as this backpack, has been very well used and worn, I do think companies should be able to regulate the warranties that they process with a specified life range. It seems like this customer has put the product through a great deal of use and should not qualify for the warranty. The company could not operate if they replaced every backpack they sold because people used them a lot. The backpack company should have the main specifics of the warranty more boldly outlined to prevent continual customer confusion.
3- Does the store have a responsibility to clarify the guarantee?
I personally believe that the store does have some responsibility to clarify and to warn the customers about the guarantee. The store should simply advertise that the backpacks have a guarantee of four years. However, I think that the retailer should look into their products’ warranties and determine whether they should continue to sell these products. I would suggest that stores should specifically state what the guarantee really means to avoid issues with customers.
4- If you were in this position, what would you do?
If I was in this position I would try my best to clarify to the customer what exactly the guarantee really means. In fact, I would apologize to the customer and try to prevent this issue from happening again. Moreover, I will keep in mind to inform all customers about the products that have a guarantee and let them know how long of a lifetime the product has to avoid any problems or misunderstandings in the future.
CHAPTER 15 – TEXT : Going Down the Drain – Text (P. 463)
1- Is NIMBY involved here? If so, in what way?
I believe NIMBY is definitely involved in this situation. This could be seen from the fact that the two brothers who owned the business were continually pouring the old motor oil down the drain rather than taking it for recycling, which can add up to the degradation of the environment. A worker even informed the owners about what they were doing was unethical and that they should dispose the motor oil in an environmentally safe manner. However, the owners did not take him seriously and stated that they did not have time to be concerned with properly disposing the motor oil. The two brothers were well aware of the fact that they were causing environmental damage and still decided to continue what they were doing, not mending their ways. Therefore, it could clearly be seen that the owners were basically avoiding and denying their responsibility for the misuse of the environment.
2- Do you share in the responsibility for negative action when you know it is happening and say nothing?
Yes, I would definitely share a responsibility towards doing something to prevent any negative action or wrongdoings that I witness. In fact, I would be considered equally accountable and liable if I did not submit a report after noticing such unethical behavior. Moreover, I may end up facing severe consequences as well.
3- What would you do if you were in that position?
If I was in this position I would immediately report the offenders for committing this act. I would personally feel that it is my responsibility to do so because these actions could severely cause environmental risk. I would bring to their attention the fact that how they are harming the environment negatively with their actions and try to persuade them to be more environmental friendly.
CHAPTER 18 – TEXT : Give Me What I want or I’ll Tell the President – Text (P. 543)
1- What are the main ethical dilemmas in this situation?
There are two main Ethical Dilemas in this scenerio, the Privacy Act and the companies policy of privacy. The privacy act is meant to keep personal information confidential, unless it deals with people who are working directly with that information. The privacy act was broken by the actions of taking confidential infotmation from the office. Getting the information of the Annual reviews is a violation because they dont know what their using that infomation for. The reviews should be strictly confidential, even when its pertaining to certain people, if the review was bad then it’s upon the reviewer to notify the person of their standing, if not they shouldn’t be looking into it either. In addition, it breaks the companies privacy of preventing violations of sensitive material.
2- Should you report the director’s threat to step over you to the president?
It is very important for an employee to report any violations of the company’s rules and policies. Therefore, I would definitely report the director’s threat to step over me to the president because the director is going against the company policy and I believe that some corrective action must be enforced to resolve this issue. I believe that if employees within a company happen to be in a conflict with one another then they should try to resolve the issue together and listen what each employee has to say. After all, we must avoid morally wrong behaviors or acts that could create major issues for the company and that may jeopardize our professional careers.
3- What would you do in this situation?
If I was in this situation I would not provide the document to the director if he wants to acquire the personnel files he will have to comply with the company policies. I would sent an email informing him of my decision and why I undertook this decision, therefore I would have the discussing in inscribed to show the president before he would reprimand me. I would raise concerns or report the intent of misconduct on the director’s part. If actions are not taken this could bring serious harm to the corporation and various penalties may arise.