Ethics and Corporate Responsibility in the Workplace and the World Essay

Ethics and corporate responsibility in the piece of guide and the world is becoming a center of attention. There be m whatsoever an(prenominal) things going on in the workplace that different agencies and people atomic number 18 looking into temporary hookup placing the blame on the appropriate source. In this paper, a scenario is presented. The scenario involved PharmaCARE and its subsidiary, CompCARE are reviewed and certain questions are being asked for clarity. The paper provide look at the s retireholders in this scenario. The paper provide do it trump to analyze the ethics of PharmaCAREs treatment of the Colberias indigenous race and its rank-and file workers versus that of its executives.In additionally, the paper give look at the perspective concerning three workers, Donna, Tom, and Ayesha under the supervision of Allen. The study of how whistleblowing, opportunities, and protection could wait on Allen rub the unethical of CompCare. An assessment of PharmaCAREs environmental creativity with the Colberian activities. The paper result address the original purpose of and changes to large Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability diddle (CERCLA). The paper bequeath now look at the get byowners in this scenario.The shareholders are major players in an organization or corporation. The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines a shareholder as one that holds or owns a share in a confederation (Shareholder, 2013). A synonym of a shareholder is stakeholder and this is someone who has liaison in the play along. Therefore, the shareholders of this scenario are Allen, Donna, Ayesha, Tom, CompCARE, PharmaCARE, WellCo, and the Colberians. Allen, Donna, Ayesha, and Tom are employees of CompCARE. They are stakeholders in this scenario be earn they work for CompCARE and this is how they pass on their living. They want the company to be successful, tho at what monetary value will it cost them.The Colberians are the people who labor to make the drug, while getting paid $1.00 a day and living in distress. PharmaCARE is the harness company of CompCARE and its goal is to wage off of CompCARE by any government agency necessary. WellCo brought theCompCARE from PharmaCARE seeing the profit it could make in this deal. Each shareholder plays a signifi give the sackt part in making sure the CompCARE is successful. The paper will now look analyze the ethics of PharmaCARE treatment of the Colberians.PharmaCARE has a company in Afri put forward and found people there willing to share information roughly local remedies and could supply workers willing to work for $1.00 a day. PharmaCARE probably look at this as a coal tap and struck the deal. This process is unethical in every way. One earth it is unethical, the employees at PharmaCARE is not working for a $1.00 a day operate nor are they living in primitive huts. The employees of PharmaCARE have electricity and foot race water while the Colberians do not get to enjoy this l uxury. The macrocosm Trade Organization, WTO established guidelines concerning labor rights and standards. Moreover, precisely because third world workers are terribly exploited, their employees will pass on frequently of the cost of improvements in labor standards achieved through inter interior(a) trade treaties to their employees in the form of write down wages (Global Issues, 2013).PharmaCARE knew the way it was treating the Colberians was not ethical the company could not pack in this fashion in the United States. PharmaCARE police squaded with some toxic leading in fatting its profit margin. The welfare of the Colberians did not concern them in any way. Hellriegel and Slocum noted a concern for a global team. The global team would have benefited PharmaCARE tremendously. The global team protagonists to define common features of goods and services that will appeal to customers in different countries. The global team members from different countries can provide insight int o an input ab go forth these unique market require and requirements for specific attributes of goods and services (Hellrigel & Slocum, 2011, p.360). A company wants to be correct in dealing with contraryers because if anything is done wrong eventually the world will find out. In this scenario, the executives profit, while the workers receive scraps. The paper will now pull it focus on the workers inside CompCARE and could termination be consider in discriminateigent in this scenario.The workers are Allen, Ayesha, Donna, and Tom. Allen is the manager and was responsibility to make sure his mental faculty was not in any health nor safetythreat. In the slip-up with Ayesha, she wanted to be promoted and nothing happen. She filed a complaint with the EEOC. The EEOC was created to increase short letter opportunities for women and minorities and to help end discrimination based on race, color, religion, disability, gender, or national origin in any personnel action (Boone & Kurtz, 2012, p. 61). Allen could have avoided this by putting Ayesha on a supervisor track. Allen could have been a federal agency model for Ayesha, while presentation her the responsibility of a supervisor.Allen should have talked to Ayesha and swelled her pointers on what she needed to do to be considered for a supervisor job. In the case of Donna, she never was one to stay out of work. She had a sodding(a) attendance until the discovery of mold was found. She became ill because nothing was done to correct the mold problem. Therefore, Allen do not have a just cause to fire Donna cogniseing the reason of her illness. She continued to work until she could no long-life and filed for worker compensation. Any employee, irrespective of their length of service, who is dismissed or subjected to a detriment for certain health and safety reasons, would have a capableness claim against their employer (Calcott, 2011, p.12). In the case of Tom, he wanted something done about the mold problem. Tom was a supervisor at CompCARE and he describe to Allen.Tom noticed how all the workers were getting sick and took action. He conscious Allen about the sir quality in the lab. Tom did the right thing in reporting all problems to his superior. The assumed Tom waited and went to Allen again to do something about the air quality. The problem gotten worsen and Tom threatened to turn the company in to OSHA. Tom would be consider a whistle blower. A whistleblower exposes the misdeeds of some others in organizations (Schermerhorn, 2010, p.100). The whistleblower Protection tour of 1989 prohibits an employee from getting fired for coitus on unethical conduct. The paper will now look at how Allen could have benefit by supporting his employees and himself. Allen knew something was not right and to that extent he did nothing when the problem was not fix. Employers are well assured of their extensive responsibilities to employees under the Health and Safety at Work bout 1974 (Calcot t, 2011, p.12).In the role Allen have, he was obligated and held the responsibility to protect his staff. Allen describe to his boss as to what was going on, therefore he should took the next stairs in finding help for his employees. Allen could have benefited himself by having a travel by conscious he did what was right.He would have been free from any quest the employees would have filed on the company. He would have been protected under the Whistleblower Act as well. Allens health was just as much danger as his staff and this should have been enough to make him ensure authority. PharmaCAREs renders a purported environmental stewardship is worst and the companys domain stance should carry an obligation to be a leader in environmental matters. PharmaCARE should be more concern about Colberians environment. PharmaCARE should want to help the people who is producing their product.They could help with building homes for the Colberians, by knowing their conditions. The executives live in nice places with running water and electricity. PharmaCARE can set up a fund in order to educate the people of Colberia. Teaching and showing people how to be more efficient will help PharmaCARE profit more. The people will be loyal to the company helping them. PharmaCARE can help the Colberians to be more productivity in everyday life. When a company goes in a foreign country to do personal credit line it should make sure of the countrys policy. Companies move their business to foreign countries are still liable if something happen. The company should be willing to help build the area up the workers live in. Building roadways to carry PharmaCAREs drugs is a significant matter. The WTO is cutting down on companies that are no treating foreigners right. This is in health and safety as well as in the United States.The WTO is an advocate for under privilege countries. It protects the right of the workers in poverty countries. There seem to be a big issue regarding children wor kers but this does not seem the case. However, WTO will not allow any mischief to come to workers in third world countries. The WTOs agreements permit members to take measures to protect not only the environment but also public health, animal health and plant health. However, these measures must be applied in the same way to both national and foreign businesses. In other words, members must not use environmental protection measures as a means of disguising protectionist policies (WTO, 2013). The author believes now things are getting better because companies know someone is watching them. The next concern to look at concerning this scenario is the encyclopedic Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act. The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) is a liability scheme rather than a monitoring program ( Halbert & Ingulli,2012, p.207). fit in to the Environmental Protection Agency the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensa tion, and Liability Act (CERCLA) commonly known as Superfund, was enacted by Congress on celestial latitude 11, 1980 (CERCLA, 2013). The CERCLAs function were to assist others when a hazardous substances might thwart others or the environment. The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act provided accountability of persons responsible for discharges of hazardous waste. It also established a trust fund to make available for cleanup when no guilty company could be acknowledged. The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act do not support the PharmaCARE scenario. The PharmaCARE is a pharmaceutical company and CERCLAs target is chemical and petroleum industries. CERCLA will assist when the responsibility people cannot be located.In this scenario the responsible party is known and could have done something about the matter before it got out of hand. The cleanup should fall on PharmaCARE and not CERCLA. There were signs and people to tell the story of what happen and how nothing was done to cease the problem. There were no transporters bringing the mold into the company. The mold grew and causing the air quality to be tamper with. PharmaCare is fully blame for this and should pay for the cleanup and compensate the workers on their health issues. PharmaCARE was bogus and should be made to buy back CompCARE from WellCo. WellCo is an vindicated party while things were being withheld from the company.ReferencesBoone, G., & Kurtz, D. (2012). Contemporary Business (14th ed.). Hoboken, NJ behind Wiley & Sons Calcott, J. (2011). Dont stumble over safety. Works Management, 64(8), 12 CERCLA. (2013). Retrieved dread 18, 2013, from http//www.epa.gov/superfund/policy/cercla.html EEOC. Retrieved July 26, 2013from http//www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/internal/eeo_policy_statement.cfm Global Issues. (2013). Retrieved August 16, 2013, from http//www.globalissues.org Halbert, T., & Ingulli, E. (2012). Law & ethic in business environment (7th ed.). Mason, OH South-Western Cengage learn Shareholder. (2013). Retrieved August 16, 2013, from www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary Hellriegel, D., & Slocum, J., W. (2011). Organization Behavior. Mason, OH South-Western Cengage LearningWTO. (2013). Retrieved August 18, 2013, from http//www.wto.org