Improvements in Dealings with Employees and Company's Responsibility to the Environment - Case Study Example

Business Legal and Ethical Issues Business Legal and Ethical Issues A Business Situation Many years ago I worked for a company that did not necessarily follow the rules. I stayed for two years. While I was working there, I noticed that the working condition for workers was not safe. People could have gotten injured while working, which would force them to lose time, and it would have forced others to pick up extra hours. Some of my co-workers chose to leave the company, without saying anything about the working conditions. We were in a union and although our union dues were being taken from our paychecks, our dues were not being paid to the union. Additionally, some workers would wait longer than necessary to get their paychecks, and for those that had lost time due to unethical practices, it was a bad process. The injured workers were also not compensated and some of them would end up being unemployed due to the resulting injuries. In the plant there were the gases and other waste products from the factory that were being produced, but were not being disposed of properly. I worked in the office, but those that worked in the plant itself were exposed to toxins that were rather harmful (Welker & Berardino, 2013). A close analysis of the business situation described above reveals that the company does not give regard to the welfare of the workers. This is because they are forced to work under unfavorable conditions a factor that compromises their safety. Moreover, injured workers do not receive any form of compensation even though the injury occurs within the workplace. The unfair conditions promoted by the company seem to offer advantage to other workers in need of extra hours because of the unfavorable pay they receive from the company. The meager pay is not delivered to the workers in time, a factor that inconveniences them terribly. As highlighted, the company does not conform to the regulations defined by the government regarding the disposal of waste products (Potočan & Mulej, 2009). Moreover, the workers have had to get used to being exposed to harmful chemicals which have the potential of compromising their health. Without doubt, the complexity of the issue observed in the company needs a stepwise analysis of both the legal and ethical issues that are evident from the situation. The following sections will address these issues. Analysis of the Ethical Concerns Raised by the Situation As described above the company in question registers many issues that can be categorized as ethical concerns. Notably, the company specializes in exploiting employees in a bid to maximize their profits, irrespective of the poor working conditions. As government regulations highlight, there is a salient need for companies to ensure that employees are assured of safety within the workplace. This is definitely not the case with the company because workers are prone to multiple injuries. This is a contravention of business ethics, principles that govern businesses and dictate that employers should provide a safe working environment. The same regulations and principles have made it clear that there is a need to compensate employees who have sustained injuries within the workplace. The company does not comply with this regulation and injured employees do not receive any form of compensation. On the contrary, they are left without compensation and are liable to losing their jobs. Worse still, they are unable to work with other companies because the injuries serve to debilitate them. The company is also guilty of compelling workers to work for unreasonably long hours in a bid to earn extra time wages. This only makes it evident that, the company does not pay the employees reasonable wages. According to business ethics, unreasonable wages and compelling workers to long for unreasonably long hours is unacceptable (Drover, Franczak, & Beltramini, 2012). In addition, the company practices unethical behavior which involves the deduction of union dues from the paychecks of its workers, but does not deliver the dues to the union. Evidently, this is a form of fraud that the company commits each single month. This is both unfair to the workers and also to the union. This is a demonstration that the company opposes the activities of the labor union and does not support it as expected by the labor union laws. Other ethical concerns surround the company’s commitment to promote environmental safety by adhering to the standards defined by the environmental regulatory bodies. This is evident because the company does not dispose its waste products in accordance with the rules defined by the environmental bodies (Drover, Franczak, & Beltramini, 2012). Moreover, the environment of the plant where many workers are posted is highly risky because they are continually exposed to numerous harmful toxins produced in the process of production. Moreover, the company fails terribly in giving the employees their wages at the appropriate time. In many instances, employees had to wait for a long period before they received their pay. Evidently, the company has the responsibility of ensuring that it addresses all the above issues and that it ensures reduced cases of the occurrence of accidents. The company should also consider creating awareness of the potential risks that the employees face within the work place. Without doubt, employees do not realize the measure of risk that they are continuously exposed to within the toxic work place (Drover, Franczak, & Beltramini, 2012). Ethical Theories When businesses are making decisions, they have to consider certain ethical principles and theories that offer the relevant guidelines concerning the available alternatives and how to choose the right one. Certain circumstances place businesses in a confusing situation as they strive to adopt the right strategies of doing things. Ethical dilemmas may result as a company strives to exhibit ethical behavior. Therefore, ethical theories denote the viewpoints developed by different theorists which can be relied during ethical analysis of situations. Deontology This theory holds that the most vital elements of our lives are governed by some particular moral rules that are unbreakable. Deontologists argue that these rules should not be broken, even if there will be an improvement to an outcome due to them being broken. This is to mean that one should do the right thing even if the outcomes of that action may be bad. This theory is identified with the famous philosopher Immanuel Kant. Deontologists believe that an action may be right irrespective of whether it is contempt or approved by others. Therefore, what deontologists consider as right may present either pleasure or pain. Deontology is a non-consequentiality theory which does not focus on the effects of actions, but rather analyses whether the action is either right or wrong (Boarini, 2012). One of the common deontological theories is the one described by Immanuel Kant, and which has become very popular among many Western philosophers. According to Kant, the categorical imperatives that he describes are the basis of determining whether an action is either right or wrong. One of the categorical imperatives highlighted that, individuals should act in a way that can be considered to conform with a universal law. The action chosen had to prove right in any region to any other person and in any other place. By this, Kant meant that it is critical for an individual to consider whether an action can fit the level of a universal law before undertaking it. This only means that individuals should not only consider their perspective towards an action, but also the perspectives of others in the society (Dougherty, 2013). This implies that, when all humans are acting in accordance with a maxim that can be considered as a universal law, people will not indulge in unethical behavior. The second categorical imperative that Kant highlighted was the fact that human beings are supposed to be treated as the end itself but not a means to the end. This means that, there is a salient need for giving high regard to humanity and respecting human life way above any other item or thing. This is because humanity has the highest value compared to all other things. Therefore, the action chosen by an individual should reflect the intrinsic value exhibited by humans. Indulging in behaviors or choosing actions that undermine the value of humans is clearly unethical (Dougherty, 2013). Deontology can be applied in determining unethical behavior committed by the company. It is evident that the company has been using the workers as a means to make profits. This is because the workers receive minimal pay, have to work for exaggerated long hours and are prone to injuries within the workplace. According to the second categorical imperative, the company proves to be unethical because of its focus on making profits and giving less regard to humanity. The company is exploiting the workers to gain profits and they do not benefit in any way. This serves to confirm the fact that they are just a means to the company’s end. This unethical behavior practiced by the company can lead to legal claims if the workers decide to sue the company (Dougherty, 2013). On the other end, the company’s actions cannot be considered as universal laws. This is to say that the company’s behavior does not conform to the Immanuel Kant’s first categorical imperative. The company fails to protect the status of human beings and regards them nearly as objects that it can use to achieve its desired objectives. The company does not own up to its moral obligation of ensuring that employees are provided with favorable working conditions and incentives of motivating them to work. The attention of the company when doing some things seems to be morally wrong. For example, when the company deducts dues from the workers pay checks, but does not forward the money to the union, it exhibits its wrong intentions of ensuring that the workers do not benefit from the union (Dougherty, 2013). Moreover, failure to compensate workers when sustain injuries only serves to highlight that the company does not recognize the value of humanity. If it did, it would promptly compensate the workers and improve the working conditions. Utilitarianism This is one of the most influential and most applied theories. It is sometimes referred to as consequentialism. Utilitarianism theory is basically used in the promotion of Good ends instead of applying the correct means. It instructs believers to go for those consequences that will produce great benefits to the majority of the people affected in the most impartial manner likely. It simply advocates for attaining the greatest value for the large majority of individuals. Utilitarianism seeks to promote the achievement of maximal benefits to the greatest percentage of the people. In an employment setting, companies and businesses should focus on considering the potential consequences of their decisions in order to determine whether they pose any benefits to the greater population. It is critical to consider the consequences from a diverse perspective contrary to the previous utilitarian consideration that focused on a single perspective (Frederiksen, 2012). With the diverse perspective in mind, companies can make decisions that present more benefits to a great percentage of the people. In the company described above, its actions are wrong according to the utilitarianism theory. Notably, the company has individualistic features explaining why it only considers its welfare, ensuring that it makes profits, and does not care about the welfare of its employees. For example, the company prefers not to compensate injured workers because of the fear of the financial implications involved. This is contrary to factors that it should view such as the resulting negative reputation because of failure to compensate and the debilitating condition of the workers. Any morally upright company strives to make decisions that benefit its employees and the greater population who are consumers of its products. However, the company exhibits individualism focusing on making profits and giving little regard to the needs of the employees (Gustafson, 2013). Since the company does not seem to consider both positive and negative consequences prior to making a decision, it is morally wrong in view of utilitarianism. According to the above analysis of the ethical concerns of the company, it emerges that, the company can adopt utilitarianism in a bid to achieve the best legal outcome. Utilitarianism will compel the company to carry out a rigorous analysis of its actions ensuring that they present maximal benefits to all the stakeholders of its business. This means that the company will consider whether its decisions help it make profits by promoting its business strategy, whether if favors employees, whether it pleases shareholders and whether it earns a good reputation in the society. If the company carries out such an analysis, it is bound to benefit immensely by making the right decisions (Gustafson, 2013). Areas of Law Occupational Health and Safety Act The Occupational Health and Safety Act are applied to make sure that there is workplace health and safety. It defines the workers’ responsibilities and rights. Workers have fundamental rights to refuse work that is not safe, take part in workplace health and safety activities and their right of knowledge of the real hazards in the workplace. Employers have certain responsibilities that they must fulfill according to OSHA. One of the critical responsibilities includes the employer’s obligation of ensuring that the workplace is safe from any form of hazard which may pose a risk to the employees. There are standards, rules and regulations established under OSHA to ensure that employers promote a safe working environment with the employees (Harrison, 2014). Employers, therefore, should seek to abide by all the regulations and continually assess the workplace in a bid to ensure that it conforms to the regulations. Without doubt, the company in question has failed in this aspect. Moreover, it has not conformed to OSHA’s requirements of ensuring the safe use of tools and equipment as well as safety and endangerment reduction. In any case, OSHA guarantees employees certain right, which specifically require that they deserve to work in an environment that does not pose any health and safety risks. OSHA also recognizes the purpose of compensation which must be accorded to worker who sustains injuries within the workplace. In view of this act, the company has failed and should take the necessary steps in a bid to meet all the requirements defined by OSHA (Harrison, 2014). Environmental Protection Act This is administered in order to protect the environment. However, there are businesses that do not follow this law. This is because they may incur more cost of complying with the law and this may decrease their profitability. The Environmental Protection Act seeks to ensure that businesses exhibit environmentally conscious behavior. This involves the proper disposal of waste products, the minimization of the release of harmful hydrocarbons to the environment and the promotion of recycling waste products. Evidently, the company under discussion in this essay has failed terribly in this regard. This is because the company practices, improper waste disposals and continuously exposes its workers to harmful toxins. There is a need for the company to rethink its responsibility to the environment and take the necessary steps to conform to the requirement of this act (Bearden et al, 2013). Employment Standard Act This law sets some particular compulsory requirements of employment. This law governs the hours of work, minimum wage, overtime pay, employees’ benefits plan, equal pay for both male and female workers, leaves, termination pay and notice for the termination of work. There are, however, some employees who may be exempted from these standards of employment, depending on their field. In accordance with this act, there a salient need for employers to ensure conformity to the regulations in a bid to avoid litigations (Bhalloo, 2010). The employers must fulfill their promise to give the required wage and other benefit packages to its employees without fail. This act serves to ensure that, there is a measure of equality among all employees and that they receive fair packages from their employers. This act was introduced after the realization that some employers exploited the employees by offering unreasonable wages and forcing them to work for extremely long hours. This practice has been noted in the company under discussion because employees receive delayed payments which are considered minimal considering the work they do. Therefore, the company should make changes in this sector and conform to this act (Bhalloo, 2010). Recommendations Evidently, this paper has highlighted both the legal and the ethical issues that the company described above must address promptly. Without doubt, the company has contravened three acts as described above and must makes efforts of meeting all the requirements described under the OSHA act, the Environmental Protection Act and the Employment Standard Act. If the company meets all the requirements defined under these laws, it will register numerous improvements in its dealings with employees, and its responsibility to the environment. Moreover, the company should strive to be morally responsible by carefully analyzing the effects of its actions before decision making. In addition, it should begin to view human beings as the end itself, but not as a means to making profits. References Bearden, D. M., Copeland, C., Luther, L., McCarthy, J. E., Tiemann, M., Yen, J. H., &Esworthy, R. (2013).Environmental Laws: Summaries of Major Statutes Administered by the Environmental Protection Agency.Congressional Research Service: Report, 1-129. Bhalloo, S. (2010).Enforcement of benefits under the employment standards act: a single jurisdiction for enforcement affirmed. U.B.C. Law Review, 43145. Boarini, S. S. (2012). What is called " deontology" ?. EthiqueEtSante, 9(4), 143-147. doi:10.1016/j.etiqe.2012.04.002 Dougherty, T. T. (2013). Agent-neutral deontology.Philosophical Studies, 163(2), 527-537. doi:10.1007/s11098-011-9829-8 Drover, W., Franczak, J., &Beltramini, R. (2012). A 30-Year Historical Examination of Ethical Concerns Regarding Business Ethics: Whos Concerned?.Journal Of Business Ethics, 111(4), 431-438. doi:10.1007/s10551-012-1214-9 Frederiksen, C. (2012). The Presentation of Utilitarianism within the Field of Business Ethics.Journal Of Business Ethics Education, 9(1), 193-214. Gustafson, A. (2013). In Defense of a Utilitarian Business Ethic.Business & Society Review (00453609), 118(3), 325-360. doi:10.1111/basr.12013 Harrison, S. (2014). OSHA safety rule riles industry. Business Insurance, 48(14), 1. Potočan, V., & Mulej, M. (2009).Toward a holistically perception of the content of business ethics.Kybernetes, 38, 581-595. Welker, J., &Berardino, L. (2013).Integrating ethical decision making in multiple business courses.Academy Of Educational Leadership Journal, 17(4), 77-93. Read More