CRITICAL THINKING AND DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

QUESTION 1:
A visiting American executive finds that a foreign subsidiary in a poor nation has
hired a 12-year-old girl to work on a factory floor, in violation of the companys prohibition
on child labor. He tells the local manager to replace the child and tell her to go back to
school. The local manager tells the American executive that the child is an orphan with no
other means of support, and she will probably become a street child if she is denied work.
What should the American executive do?

ANSWER 1:
This situation really happened over the world and it is a very real ethical
dilemma that the American executive facing. Both of the alternatives have its own right
and wrong. As a student, neither alternativeviolating the companys position on child
labor, nor putting the child out on the streetsseems acceptable. But in the aspect of
American executive might choose to allow the child to continue to work in the factory
which could prevent the little girl became street child and still can earn income for her
although that has violated the companys policy.


QUESTION 2:
Drawing upon John Rawlss concept of the veil of ignorance, develop an ethical code
that will (a) guide the decisions of a large oil multinational toward environmental protection,
and (b) influence the policies of a clothing company to outsourcing of manufacturing process.

ANSWER 2:
John Rawls suggested that a decision is just and ethical if people would allow for
it when designing a social system under a veil of ignorance. Rawls veil of ignorance is a
conceptual tool that can contribute towards the moral compass that managers can use
to help them navigate through difficult ethical dilemmas.
(a) Although in some large oil multinational countries will not charge for violating
laws if there are leakage of oil happening, but the companies should consider
about the ethical dilemmas by contributing toward environmental protection.
The policy of the companies should strengthen the ethical issue on the
environmental protection because this is an order of the society.
(b) The companies who did outsourcing is to reduce costs by transferring portions of
work to outside suppliers rather than completing it internally. This also means
that the manufacturing process will be taken place in other countries. Therefore,
the companies should consider about the ethical dilemmas issue toward the
pollution that might happen the outsourcing countries during the manufacturing
process. The company should strengthen the policy on minimization of waste in
order to fulfill the order of the society.







QUESTION 3: Under what conditions is it ethically defensible to outsource production to the
developing world where labor costs are lower when such actions also involve laying off long-
term employees in the firms home country?

ANSWER 3:
Many American companies are outsourcing not only blue collar work, but white
collar positions to the developing world. Students are facing a tenuous job market
where positions that they may have sought when they began their college degrees are
being shipped abroad. From the first point of view, the companies have to do what is
best for all stakeholders, and if that means taking advantage of cheaper labor costs
elsewhere, then that is the appropriate strategy. Others however, it can viewed as that
companies owe a social debt to their home countries, and that loyalty from long term
employees should be rewarded.





QUESTION 4: Are facilitating payments ethical?

ANSWER 4:
A facilitating payment is a certain type of payment to foreign officials which is not
considered to be bribery according to legislations of some states as well as in the international
anti-bribery conventions.For legal purposes, it is distinguished from bribery, however the
distinction is often blurred. The value of the payment is not immediately relevant, however the
greater the value, the higher are chances that it will be a red flag for law enforcement. Small
unofficial payments are customary and even legal in some countries, nevertheless they may
present a risk of liability according to the laws of the host country. There also exists a slippery
slope danger of evolving into dubious payments. Certainly, the notion of when in Rome, do
as the Romans do. However, those taking this perspective should recognize that it may
be difficult to draw the line on exactly what is acceptable under this guise, and when
bribery goes too far.

QUESTION 5: A manager from a developing country is overseeing a multinationals
operations in a country where drug trafficking and lawlessness are rife. One day, a
representative of a local big man approaches the manager and asks for a donation to help
the big man provide housing for the poor. The representative tells the manager that in
return for the donation, the big man will make sure that the manager has a productive stay
in his country. No threats are made, but the manager is well aware that the big man heads a
criminal organization that is engaged in drug trafficking. He also knows that the big man
does indeed help the poor in the run down neighborhood of the city where he was born.
What should the manager do?

ANSWER 5:
We can probably argue that because the Big Man involved is involved in
unethical behavior like drug trafficking, the manager should not even consider making
the donation. On the other hand, we may take the perspective that because drug
trafficking is a fact of life in some countries, this needs to be viewed differently. If the
Big Man is actually using his muscle to provide assistance to help the poor, then
perhaps the manager should consider making the donation.

QUESTION 6: Reread the Management Focus feature on Unocal and answer the following
questions:
a) Was it ethical for Unocal to enter into a partnership with a brutal military dictatorship for
financial gain?
b) What actions could Unocal have taken, short of not investing at all, to safeguard the human
rights of people impacted by the gas pipeline project?

ANSWER 6:
a) Unocal made its investment in Myanmar just as many other companies were
leaving the country in protest of the nations brutal military dictatorship. The company
had formed an agreement with the government that involved clearing a path for a new
pipeline. The investment became controversial when, in order to fulfill the agreement,
Myanmars army forcibly moved villagers and then forced them to work under slave-
like conditions. Unocal claims it had no knowledge of what was occurring, but this
claim was rejected by a judge who heard the case that was filed against Unocal on
behalf of Myanmar villagers.


b) We are familiar with the notion that even if something is not explicitly
forbidden, it does not mean it is right. This idea would certainly seem to apply in this
case. Ethical responsibility goes beyond the letter of the law to encompass the idea of
behaving in a certain way simply because it is the right thing to do. The company failed
to act in an ethical manner, and that while it may not have directly participated in the
brutality against villagers, Unocal did have a responsibility to oversee what was going
on and ensure that people were treated fairly.