The thesis statement is to determine how managers should use ethical issues in decision making, how the areas of CRS are applied in the business, how the business should care for its stakeholders. A stakeholder is any person, entty or it can be any living thing that has interest in the business. The stake holders are important in the business and the managers should take care of their interests and needs. The CRS areas are economic, legal, philanthropic and ethical (Kaplan eGuide to Ethics and the Legal Environment, Chapter 1-4)
The stake holders in the case study are the employees, the environment, the community. The investors and the engineers are also part of the stakeholders in the business since they have interest in the business. The various stakeholders in the business have various interests. The employees who are the major stake holders in the business and they have a lot of interest in the business. This is because the employees depend on the business for salary that helps them to have a better living as they are able to meet their basic needs like cloths, food and housing. The engineer depends on the business for his salary that helps him in achieving his basic needs. The community depends on the business for philanthropic services that are basically charity activities. The business has aright to make charity contributions to the community so as to help the community to grow economically. (Kaplan eGuide to Ethics and the Legal Environment, Chapter 1-4)
The charity work can be building of schools, churches or provision of employment to the community. For example, the employees are part of the community and are able to earn salary thus being able to help their families and the community at large. The environment is a stakeholder as it has interest in the business since it provides the right locations for the business and the people in it. Environmental laws apply to the case. This includes the air act. The air act is applicable in this case because George’s plant is emitting waste product in to the air causing air pollution and the Ardnak plants is also emitting waste products into the air causing air pollution. This action interferes with stakeholders like the environment, the community and the employees. The government is not applying the rules that it has set like air act law well because the government allows the companies to dispose the waste material into the air after being charged some fine (Kaplan eGuide to Ethics and the Legal Environment, Chapter 1-4).
This is according to Bills idea that the EPA would levy the company some fine so as to dispose the waste material. Other firms also go unnoticed even after using illegal means to dispose the waste. The government is not making ethical decisions as it allows the firms to relocate to new areas so as to dispose its waste. The government allows the plants to relocate to new area so as to dispose its waste without facing any restriction from the government. These actions show that the government actions are not legal. The laws do not apply to the actions in the case because the companies are emitting the waste products to the environment without facing any legal measures. The firms are also able to relocate to others area to release the waste material thus causing more harm to the people. This is clear that the laws do not apply in this case. If the imperative theory is applied to this case by the decision makers to the actions in the case study then the actions will be considered illegal. This is because the dumping of waste materials is wrong and it affects the environment that includes plants, the people causing harm.
The action is not ethical as the dumping of waste cannot be accepted. (Kaplan eGuide to Ethics and the Legal Environment, Chapter 1-4). The government actions are also not ethical since the permitting of firms to dump waste materials is not acceptable. The actions in the case study would be illegal and unethical if the categorical imperative theory is used. The use of utilitarian theory in the case has more benefit to the stakeholders and the business. They decision makers weigh the advantages and the disadvantages of the action and if the advantages outweigh the disadvantages then the action is considered ethical. The relocation of the company causes pollution to the new residents and it also destroys the infrastructure and it can also result to lose of jobs for the friend and the extended family. With application of the utilitarian theory the company should not relocate so as to retain the employees and avoid disposal of waste materials to the new residents and destruction of infrastructure. The company has to think of better ways of correcting the problem.
By doing this George will be considered to have made an ethical decision that benefits everyone in the company and the community despite the legal measures (Werther, Chandler, 2006) The application of rights theory in the case study makes the companies in the case study to make right decisions that protect the right of the employees and the community and still benefit themselves. Georges plant will be able to make the right decision of not relocating thus saving the employees their jobs and preventing contamination of the environment of other residents and destroying their infrastructure. This decision makes George to respect the rights of the employees as they will be able to get income and have their basic needs and the company will respect the rights of the community and the employees by preventing pollution but instead finding a better solution to his problem.
If justice theory is applied in this case by decision makers then the actions that are carried out by the companies and the government will be considered unethical (Werther,Chandler,2006)This is because the dumping of waste material pollutes the environment and this interferes with the rights of the employees and the community and the environment and the government action is considered injustice because it permits the companies to dump the waste material thus interfering with rights of other people thus the actions are not ethical. The four areas of corporate social responsibility are economic, legal, ethical and philanthropic. The business should work inline with the four areas of CRS. The economic is aimed at minding the welfare of the employees and the business. The business should follow the laws set and it should make ethical decisions and it should contribute to the community. The four areas are important to the stakeholders as the business meets their interests and needs (Werther, Chandler, 2006)
The company should look for better ways of making decisions so as to avoid conflicts of interest in the organization (Werther, Chandler, 2006). This is because the company should consider the interest and needs of its stakeholders who in this case are the environment, the employees and the community. Dumping of waste interferes with the environment, the employees and the community. They should make decision that is just, that protect the interest of the stakeholders. The corporation should make decisions that are inline with foundation of moral development as with the ethical theories and the foundation of moral development the business is able to make the right decisions that benefit every one. This helps the company to enhance business survival and profitability. The corporation should follow the four areas of CRS so as to benefit the stakeholders and the business by meting their interest needs (Werther, Chandler, 2006)
Reference
Kaplan eGuide to Ethics and the Legal Environment , Chapter 1-4
Werther, W.,& Chandler, D (2006).Strategic corporate social responsibility: stakeholders in a global environment. SAGE
