Utilitarian and Kantian Analysis of Chocolate Unwrapped - Case Study Example

Chocolate Unwrapped Name: Tutor: Course: Date: Table of Contents Table of Contents 1 Introduction 2 Ethical Issues 2 Child Labor 2 Fair working conditions 3 Health and safety 4 Exploitation 4 Utilitarian and Kantian analysis of Chocolate Unwrapped 5 Utilitarianism 5 Kantian Analysis 6 Recommendations 7 Conclusion 8 References 9 Conventions and Acts 9 Introduction The essay aims at providing a decision on whether the Australian chocolate company can enter into a valid contract with a cocoa broker in Cote D’Ivoire. Several issues are addressed like child labor, unfair working conditions, exploitation and adverse terms of safety and health of children. Under Act Utilitarianism, children should be exploited in the cocoa fields as long as they can provide free labor, provided with food which they are lucky to have and kept away from the battleground. The utilitarian rule goes in favor of the cocoa broker who is seen as a better alternative by the children for providing food and security (Rwomire, 2001). In Kantian analysis, Kant insists on people doing the moral duty by arguing that no individual should be used as a means to an end. The merchant should take in the children as students who need schooling and not labor. His thoughts are directed to the intentions of the person. The coffee merchant’s intentions are not to save the children from vagaries of war but to exploit them and maximize his profits. Kant takes a rational view of morality and is opposed to the Utilitarian dimension of the end justifies the means (Wood, 2009). The essay recommends that the organization should not enter into the contract with the broker from Cote D’Ivoire. This is because by agreeing to enter into the contract, it would be tantamount to accepting the actions of the broker. Ethical Issues Child Labor Child labor is an ethical issue that is conspicuous in the chocolate unwrapped case. Children who should be in school are working in Cocoa fields in Cote D’Ivoire. They have limited knowledge and experience on their roles and responsibilities. The level of understanding of work does not match that of the employer. Bass (2004) observes that children especially those between five and ten years are too young to comprehend production processes, productivity targets and rational decisions. The legal considerations in employment stipulate entering into contracts with people who have come of age and of sound mind. In the Cote D’Ivoire, the children are not eligible to enter employment agreements as they are unfit and incapable of making decisions on their own. Children need basic and secondary education upon which they can enter into employment of their choice (Herumin, 2008; Clarke, 2002). Rwomire (2001) notes that child labor is forced employment in stringent violation of their right to education, basic and emotional needs. The government of Cote D’Ivoire has lost control of its leadership structures hence allowing rogue entrepreneurs and merchants to violate the rights of women and children. The International Labor Organization (ILO) convention on the minimum age for admission to work and employment is 14 years. At fourteen or fifteen years, children will have finished compulsory schooling. For hazardous work, the minimum age must be 18 years since the work is likely to endanger the child’s mental, physical, moral health and safety (Bass, 2004; Herumin 2008). At the ages of 12-14 years, children may be allowed to do light work which is not threatening to the safety and health or hindering their training, vocational orientation or education. Fair working conditions The cocoa broker has not provided fair working conditions for the children. In a business environment, all companies are expected to provide for all its employees, fair working conditions. Fairness is more attributed to pay and benefits. In the Cote D’Ivoire the employer is attempting to reduce labor costs to a bare minimum and maximize profits. Profits should be shared among the contributing shareholders on an equitable basis. Hill and Jones (2007) agree that the components of a fair work place include benefits for work and a fair pay. This also includes provision of a work environment that is nondiscriminatory. In this case, there is no evidence of payment of wages or salaries to the workers. They are paid in an arrangement of food for work or occasional tips for pleasing the employment. The government of Cote D’Ivoire is at present not capable of regulating or enforcing fair workplaces because of heightened insecurity and presence of a belligerent rebel movement. Fair Work Australia stipulates that employees have express rights to fair pay and benefits which should also include obligations on terminations, resignation, dismissal and redundancy (Herumin, 2008). The Fair Work Act of 2009 provides for minimum entitlements for leave provisions, superannuation, work place health and safety and minimum wages and conditions. The act also abhors bullying, discrimination, and unfair termination or redundancy and general protections. Children having not entered into a valid contract have no entitlements hence subject to the above violations. Health and safety Control of safety and health interests of employees is one area of ethical consideration to employers. Agriculture and manufacturing plants or other workplaces engaging in physically demanding work or using dangerous equipment needs to eliminate accidents, and have safety standards meeting federal requirements. In Cote D’Ivoire, children are using dangerous tools like machetes in opening cocoa pods, scantily clothed, squatting instead of sitting at work, and strenuous processes. Work Health and Safety Act 2011 provides for a nationally consistent and balanced framework to secure the safety and health of workplaces and workers. Bredeson (2011) argues that workers and other persons need to be given the highest protection levels against harm to their safety, health and welfare from work risks and hazards. The farm which is the standard workplace in this case, pose health risks to the children who have to squat the whole day opening and cracking the cocoa pods. They are also used dangerous tools like machetes without protection. The broker has opted to cut corners on equipment, safety controls and training to reduce costs. It is potentially damaging and unethical in the long run when children encounter major accidents or loss of life (Herumin, 2008; Arvidsson, 2010). Exploitation The children working in the fields are orphans who could alternatively have been working as sex slaves or child soldiers in the rebel armies. When the employer takes undue advantage over children because of their disposition is equally unethical (Bredeson, 2011). The broker instead saw an opportunity in the precariousness of the situation in the country to maximize profits and seek individual enrichment. The failure of the chocolate market arises from externalities associated with production and sourcing of raw materials through coercion or force. Children find working in the cacao fields a better alternative than being away as child soldiers or sex slaves. They are already predisposed to inhumane treatment which is synonymous to circumstances of a broken state or society. The broker is not likely to respect the children and their rights as they do not have caretakers who are parents. Erwin (2011) notes that exploitation is the worst form of inhuman treatment as the children grow in a depressive and condescending environment. They will grow to lack self-esteem and better understanding of a favorable work environment. Utilitarian and Kantian analysis of Chocolate Unwrapped Utilitarianism Utilitarianism refers to the proper course of action that is likely to maximize the overall happiness. A person examines the effect of his or her actions so as to decide the moral correctness of the actions under the guidelines of utilitarianism. If the total net benefits of an action outweigh the total net benefit of another action, then the action is morally right. Utilitarianism is likely to support the Cote D’Ivoire case in that the total benefits of children working for food outweighs the susceptibility to being child soldiers or sex slaves. The perspective of utilitarianism considers internalization of moral norms of society or group. It observes that cultures around the world have difference in ethical values based on normative ethical views. Clarke (2002) suggests that each society has a continuum of ethical values that decides what is morally wrong or right. Utilitarianism in this case disregards the intentions or desires that motivate them and only look at the results of the actions. Intentions seem somehow significant. It is undesirable to call employment of children in cocoa plantations ‘overall good’ if the intention of rescuing them from recruitment as child soldiers is to exploit them for business success (Clarke, 2002; Rwomire, 2001). In this case, societies engender inequalities but must assist the disadvantaged such as the disabled and the sick. People assess actions depending on the set of rules meant to yield the highest net benefits to all people affected. Employing and exploiting children is morally wrong to all nations (Rwomire, 2001). Equally wrong is violence that takes children as child soldiers and sex servants. The children in both cases are exploited and inhumanly treated. They suffer mistreatment and violation of their basic rights. The benefits of rescuing them from being child soldiers do not outweigh the total benefit of overworking them without pay. Both are adverse situations under moral or legal considerations. They are not considered ethical or moral under utilitarianism since the total benefits of one side cannot outweigh the total benefits of the other (Mele & Schepers, 2013). From the perspective of the cocoa broker, the total benefits are higher by making more profits from sales and also committing children to work who could otherwise have been exploited elsewhere. This is truly utilitarian. However, the norms and morals and defined by society and not individuals who are subjective. The national and global community finds the situation in Cote D’Ivoire unethical and exploitation of children as immoral. The employer observes that children are privileged in the basics of rights such as security and food instead of languishing in battle fields or sex industry. Utilitarianism therefore provides that children should be exploited in the cocoa fields as long as they can provide free labor, provided with food which they are lucky to have and kept away from the battleground. The utilitarian rule goes in favor of the cocoa broker who is perceived as a ‘savior’ to the children for providing food and security (Jennings, 2011). The ultimate is for the broker to minimize costs and maximize profits. He or she perceives this as a win-win situation if both are to be fair on each other. The end justifies the means where profits are to be made irrespective of how they are made. No matter what conditions the workers are subjected to, they should yield good returns to the merchant. Act Utilitarianism yields repugnant moral conclusions of employing children to maximize the profits of the merchant (Weiss, 2008). The act looks at the results rather than the motive which is central to the moral issue. Act Utilitarianism says that people should commit injustices or violate rights when doing so would bring the greatest total amount of happiness (Arvidsson, 2010). It alleges that one should prevail over an action owing to its ‘good consequences’ because the good consequence is not limited to what decreases or increases happiness. The cacao broker perceives child soldiers and sex slavery as per se bad but not child labor. Kantian Analysis Kant takes a rational view of morality and is opposed to the Utilitarian dimension of the end justifies the means. He insisted on people doing the moral duty. In this cocoa case, Kant argues that the merchant should take in the children as students who need schooling and not labor. His thoughts are directed to the intentions of the person. The coffee merchant’s intentions are not to save the children from vagaries of war but to exploit them and maximize his profits. According to Wood (2009) Kant’s Categorical Imperative notion reiterates that no individual should be used as a means to an end. Therefore, the cocoa broker in Cote D’Ivoire falls short of Kantian rules as he or she exploits the children to maximize profits in the name of rescuing them from the battlefields. Kant proposes a theory under three maxims. Maxim 1: Do X in circumstance Y to bring about Z. In this case, the merchant employs the children for food and maximize his profits because they were at risk of being child soldiers. Maxim 2: Everybody constantly does X in situation Y to bring about Z. In this case, everyone employs children for food and maximize their profits because they (children) were at risk of being child soldiers. Maxim 3: Observe the Perturbed Social World (PSW), what happens if Maxim 2 is added to existing laws of nature to reach equilibrium (Wood, 2009). The maxim then asks; 1. Can you rationally act on your maxim in the PSW? 2. Would you rationally choose the PSW as a member? The first question contradicts Conception Test while the second contradicts the Will Test. Having answered both questions for the maxim to be acceptable, the answer is NO. This then means that the maxim is rejected. The merchant should not employ the children for food and maximize his profits because they were at risk of being child soldiers or sex slaves. The action by the broker is not ethical. Recommendations The Australian organization should not enter into the contract with the broker from Cote D’Ivoire. Agreeing to enter into the contract would be tantamount to accepting the actions of the broker. This will mean participating indirectly in child labor, adverse safety and health of children, unfair work conditions and exploitation. The decision not to enter into contract with the broker is derived from Kantian ethics that, the merchant should not employ the children for food and maximize his profits, because they were at risk of being child soldiers or sex slaves. The action by the broker is not ethical. The supply chain that involves exploitative production processes, child labor and unfair work conditions should be discouraged. When all buyers refuse to enter into contract with the broker, he or she will accept to go by the acceptable maxim of fair work conditions, employing people of mature age and observing safety, health and welfare of workers (Weiss, 2008). Conclusion The essay has established that the actions of the merchant in Cote D’Ivoire of employing children in cocoa plantations are exploitative and unfair. The buyer from Australia is not obliged to enter into a valid contract with a broker who instead has entered into an invalid contract with his or her workers. The broker has violated the ILO convention on the minimum age for admission to work and employment which is 14 years. At less than fourteen or fifteen years, children should still be under compulsory schooling. The work is hazardous involving use of dangerous tools for people falling short of the minimum age must be 18 years. The work endangers the child’s mental, physical, moral health and safety (Cory, 2006). From the perspective of the cocoa broker, the total benefits are higher by making more profits from sales and also committing children to work who could otherwise have been exploited elsewhere. This is truly utilitarian. Kant has argued through the Categorical Imperative notion that no individual should be used as a means to an end. Therefore, the cocoa broker in Cote D’Ivoire falls short of Kantian rules as he or she exploits the children to maximize profits in the name of rescuing them from the battlefields. References Arvidsson, S. (2010). Communication of Corporate Social Responsibility: A Study of the Views of Management Teams in Large Companies. Journal of Business Ethics.96 (3): 66-79. Bass, L.E. (2004). Child Labor in Sub-Saharan Africa. Lynne Rienner Publishers. Bredeson, D. (2011). Applied Business Ethics: A skills Based Approach. Cengage Learning. Clarke, P.J. (2002). Examining Philosophy and Ethics. Nelson Thornes. Cory, J. (2006). Business Ethics: The Ethical Revolution of Minority Shareholders. Springer. Erwin, P. M. (2011). Corporate Codes of Conduct: The Effects of Code Content and Quality on Ethical Performance. Journal of business ethics 99, no. 4 (1): 535-548. Herumin, W. (2008). Child Labor Today: A Human Rights Issue. Enslow Publishers. Hill, C., & Jones, G. (2007). Strategic Management: An Integrated Approach. Wall street Journal. Cengage Learning. 33(10): 876-921. Jennings, M. (2011). Business Ethics: Case studies and Selected Readings. Cengage Learning. Mele, V. & Schepers, D. H. (2013). E Pluribus Unum? Legitimacy Issues and Multi-stakeholder Codes of Conduct." Journal of Business Ethics. 10(2): 104-127. Rwomire, A. (2001). African Women and Children: Crisis and Response. Greenwood Publsihing Group. Weiss, J. (2008). Business Ethics: A stakeholder and Issues Management Approach. Cengage Learning. Wood, R. O. (2009). Kantian Ethics. Cambridge University Press. Conventions and Acts Minimum Age Convention, 1973 (No. 138). The Fair Work Act of 2009 Work Health and Safety Act 2011 Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999 (No.182) Read More