Business Ethics.doc Answer Sheet

BUSINESS ETHICSSubmitted by: - Rupam JhaQ1(a) Ethics has no place in the business. Discuss this statement

Answer- BUSINESS ORGANIZATIONAL ETHICS BUSINESS Organizational ethics is a tool that shapes an organization as a community. In every organization, there is something that works well, which can serve as a foundation for significant progress toward a desired future. Organizational ethics pays special attention to the best of an organization's past and present to ignite its collective imagination of what might be. It builds from what is working well now toward where the organization and its stakeholders truly desire to go. Organizational ethics sees an organization as a community to be valued and explored. It strives to quicken and intensify existing individual capabilities and organizational capacities, extend their number and scope, organize them so that their conflicts will be harmonized, and mobilize their energies of will and intellect to bring them to self-realization. Organizational integrity is the end sought. It is a dynamic state of being and process; it both shapes and improves. It is about moving the organization toward its guiding image of the future.

Ethics is two things.First, ethics refers to well based standards of right and wrong that prescribe what humans ought to do, usually in terms of rights, obligations, benefits to society, fairness, or specific virtues. Ethics, for example, refers to those standards that impose the reasonable obligations to refrain from rape, stealing, murder, assault, slander, and fraud. Ethical standards also include those that enjoin virtues of honesty, compassion, and loyalty. And, ethical standards include standards relating to rights, such as the right to life, the right to freedom from injury, and the right to privacy. Such standards are adequate standards of ethics because they are supported by consistent and well founded reasons.Secondly, ethics refers to the study and development of one's ethical standards. As mentioned above, feelings, laws, and social norms can deviate from what is ethical. So it is necessary to constantly examine one's standards to ensure that they are reasonable and well-founded. Ethics also means, then, the continuous effort of studying our own moral beliefs and our moral conduct, and striving to ensure that we, and the institutions we help to shape, live up to standards that are reasonable and solidly-based.

A Framework for Thinking Ethically in decision makingThis information is designed as an introduction to thinking ethically. We all have an image of our better selves-of how we are when we act ethically or are "at our best." We probably also have an image of what an ethical community, an ethical business, an ethical government, or an ethical society should be. Ethics really has to do with all these levels-acting ethically as individuals, creating ethical organizations and governments, and making our society as a whole ethical in the way it treats everyone.What is Ethics?Simply stated, ethics refers to standards of behavior that tell us how human beings ought to act in the many situations in which they find themselves-as friends, parents, children, citizens, businesspeople, teachers, professionals, and so on.

It is helpful to identify what ethics is NOT:1 Ethics is not the same as feelings. Feelings provide important information for our ethical choices. Some people have highly developed habits that make them feel bad when they do something wrong, but many people feel good even though they are doing something wrong. And often our feelings will tell us it is uncomfortable to do the right thing if it is hard.2 Ethics is not religion. Many people are not religious, but ethics applies to everyone. Most religions do advocate high ethical standards but sometimes do not address all the types of problems we face.3 Ethics is not following the law. A good system of law does incorporate many ethical standards, but law can deviate from what is ethical. Law can become ethically corrupt, as some totalitarian regimes have made it. Law can be a function of power alone and designed to serve the interests of narrow groups. Law may have a difficult time designing or enforcing standards in some important areas, and may be slow to address new problems.4 Ethics is not following culturally accepted norms. Some cultures are quite ethical, but others become corrupt -or blind to certain ethical concerns (as the United States was to slavery before the Civil War). "When in Rome, do as the Romans do" is not a satisfactory ethical standard.5 Ethics is not science. Social and natural science can provide important data to help us make better ethical choices. But science alone does not tell us what we ought to do. Science may provide an explanation for what humans are like. But ethics provides reasons for how humans ought to act. And just because something is scientifically or technologically possible, it may not be ethical to do it.

Why Identifying Ethical Standards is HardThere are two fundamental problems in identifying the ethical standards we are to follow:1. On what do we base our ethical standards?2. How do those standards get applied to specific situations we face?If our ethics are not based on feelings, religion, law, accepted social practice, or science, what are they based on? Many philosophers and ethicists have helped us answer this critical question. They have suggested at least five different sources of ethical standards we should use.

Five Sources of Ethical Standards

The Utilitarian ApproachSome ethicists emphasize that the ethical action is the one that provides the most good or does the least harm, or, to put it another way, produces the greatest balance of good over harm. The ethical corporate action, then, is the one that produces the greatest good and does the least harm for all who are affected-customers, employees, shareholders, the community, and the environment. Ethical warfare balances the good achieved in ending terrorism with the harm done to all parties through death, injuries, and destruction. The utilitarian approach deals with consequences; it tries both to increase the good done and to reduce the harm done.

The Rights ApproachOther philosophers and ethicists suggest that the ethical action is the one that best protects and respects the moral rights of those affected. This approach starts from the belief that humans have a dignity based on their human nature per se or on their ability to choose freely what they do with their lives. On the basis of such dignity, they have a right to be treated as ends and not merely as means to other ends. The list of moral rights -including the rights to make one's own choices about what kind of life to lead, to be told the truth, not to be injured, to a degree of privacy, and so on-is widely debated; some now argue that non-humans have rights, too. Also, it is often said that rights imply duties-in particular, the duty to respect others' rights.

The Fairness or Justice ApproachAristotle and other Greek philosophers have contributed the idea that all equals should be treated equally. Today we use this idea to say that ethical actions treat all human beings equally-or if unequally, then fairly based on some standard that is defensible. We pay people more based on their harder work or the greater amount that they contribute to an organization, and say that is fair. But there is a debate over CEO salaries that are hundreds of times larger than the pay of others; many ask whether the huge disparity is based on a defensible standard or whether it is the result of an imbalance of power and hence is unfair.

The Common Good ApproachThe Greek philosophers have also contributed the notion that life in community is a good in itself and our actions should contribute to that life. This approach suggests that the interlocking relationships of society are the basis of ethical reasoning and that respect and compassion for all others-especially the vulnerable-are requirements of such reasoning. This approach also calls attention to the common conditions that are important to the welfare of everyone. This may be a system of laws, effective police and fire departments, health care, a public educational system, or even public recreational areas.

The Virtue ApproachA very ancient approach to ethics is that ethical actions ought to be consistent with certain ideal virtues that provide for the full development of our humanity. These virtues are dispositions and habits that enable us to act according to the highest potential of our character and on behalf of values like truth and beauty. Honesty, courage, compassion, generosity, tolerance, love, fidelity, integrity, fairness, self-control, and prudence are all examples of virtues. Virtue ethics asks of any action, "What kind of person will I become if I do this?" or "Is this action consistent with my acting at my best?"

Putting the Approaches TogetherEach of the approaches helps us determine what standards of behavior can be considered ethical. There are still problems to be solved, however.The first problem is that we may not agree on the content of some of these specific approaches. We may not all agree to the same set of human and civil rights.We may not agree on what constitutes the common good. We may not even agree on what is a good and what is a harm.The second problem is that the different approaches may not all answer the question "What is ethical?" in the same way. Nonetheless, each approach gives us important information with which to determine what is ethical in a particular circumstance. And much more often than not, the different approaches do lead to similar answers.

Making DecisionsMaking good ethical decisions requires a trained sensitivity to ethical issues and a practiced method for exploring the ethical aspects of a decision and weighing the considerations that should impact our choice of a course of action. Having a method for ethical decision making is absolutely essential. When practiced regularly, the method becomes so familiar that we work through it automatically without consulting the specific steps.The more novel and difficult the ethical choice we face, the more we need to rely on discussion and dialogue with others about the dilemma. Only by careful exploration of the problem, aided by the insights and different perspectives of others, can we make good ethical choices in such situations.We have found the following framework for ethical decision making a useful method for exploring ethical dilemmas and identifying ethical courses of action.

A Framework for Ethical Decision MakingRecognize an Ethical Issue1. Is there something wrong personally, interpersonally, or socially? Could the conflict, the situation, or the decision be damaging to people or to the community?2. Does the issue go beyond legal or institutionalconcerns? What does it do to people, who have dignity, rights, and hopes for a better life together?Get the Facts3. What are the relevant facts of the case? What facts are unknown?4. What individuals and groups have an important stake in the outcome? Do some have a greater stake because they have a special need or because we have special obligations to them?

5. What are the options for acting? Have all the relevant persons and groups been consulted? If you showed your list of options to someone you respect, what would that person say?Evaluate Alternative Actions From Various Ethical Perspectives6. Which option will produce the most good and do the least harm?Utilitarian Approach: The ethical action is the one that will produce the greatest balance of benefits over harms.7. Even if not everyone gets all they want, will everyone's rights and dignity still be respected?Rights Approach: The ethical action is the one that most dutifully respects the rights of all affected.8. Which option is fair to all stakeholders?Fairness or Justice Approach: The ethical action is the one that treats people equally, or if unequally, that treats people proportionately and fairly.9. Which option would help all participate more fully in the life we share as a family, community, society?Common Good Approach: The ethical action is the one that contributes most to the achievement of a quality common life together.10. Would you want to become the sort of person who acts this way (e.g., a person of courage or compassion)?Virtue Approach: The ethical action is the one that embodies the habits and values of humans at their best.Make a Decision and Test It11. Considering all these perspectives, which of the options is the right or best thing to do?12. If you told someone you respect why you chose this option, what would that person say? If you had to explain your decision on television, would you be comfortable doing so?Act, Then Reflect on the Decision Later13. Implement your decision. How did it turn out for all concerned? If you had it to do over again, what would you do differently?======================================================IN BUSINESS ORGANIZATION, THE PEOPLE TAKE AN ORDINARY/ REGULAR DECISIONAND PUT IT THROUGH THE ETHICS FILTER.Ethics FiltersUntil now we have been discussing a generic decision model similar to those taught in every business school and management training program. But our concern is not just decision making; it is ethical decision making.The ethical component of the decision making process takes the form of a set of "filters". Their purpose is to separate the sought after elements from their containing environment.At key steps in the process the decision maker can stop and run his/her considerations through these filters and thereby separate the ethical conations from the remainder of the decision. This ensures that the ethical issues imbedded in the decision can be given consideration.In their academic form, the language for these filters is too complex and academic for most employees. In simplifying the process we risked losing some of the finer points but dramatically increased the utility of the ethics filters process.To make it easy to understand and apply these ethics filters we have adapted to mnemonic word PLUS.1 P = PoliciesIs it consistent with my organization's policies, procedures and guidelines?2 L= LegalIs it acceptable under the applicable laws and regulations?3 U = UniversalDoes it conform to the universal principles/values my organization has adopted?4 S= Self5 Does it satisfy my personal definition of right, good and fair?PLUS presumes effective communication with all employees so there is a common understanding of:1 the organization's policies and procedures as they apply to the situation.2 the applicable laws and regulations.3 the agreed to set of "universal" values - in this case Empathy, Patience, Integrity, Courage (EPIC)4 the individual's sense of right, fair and good springing from their personal values set.PLUS also presumes a formal mechanism, provided by the organization, to allow employees access to a definitive interpretation of the policies, laws and universal values when their own knowledge of these PLUS factors is insufficient for them to make the decision with a high level of confidence.The PLUS filters work as an integral part of steps 1, 3 and 6 of the decision making process. The decision maker applies the four PLUS filters to determine if the ethical component(s) of the decision are being surfaced/addressed/satisfied.1 Step 12 Define the problem (PLUS surface the ethical issues)3 Does the existing situation violate any of the PLUS considerations?4 Step 25 Identify available alternative solutions to the problem6 Step 37 Evaluate the identified alternatives (PLUS assess their ethical impact)8 Will the alternative I am considering resolve the PLUS violations?9 Will the alternative being considered create any new PLUS considerations?10 Are the ethical trade-offs acceptable?11 Step 412 Make the decision13 Step 514 Implement the decision15 Step 616 Evaluate the decision (PLUS surface any remaining/new ethical issues)17 Does the resultant situation resolve the earlier PLUS considerations?18 Are there any new PLUS considerations to be addressed?

The user should realize that the PLUS filters do not guarantee an ethical decision. They merely ensure that the ethical components of the situation will be surfaced so that they might be considered.While PLUS suggests a process for assessing the ethical impact of a decision, ultimately whether or not the decision meets the ethical standards of the organization or the individual decision maker is a matter of personal responsibility. After all, ethics is about choices.

(b) An ethic of caring conflicts with morality because morality requires impartiality. Discuss this criticism of an ethic of caring

Answer- Q2(a) From an ethical point of view, big business is always bad business. Discuss the pros and cons of this statement

Answer- THIS GENERALIZATION OF THE STATEMENT IS NOT RIGHT.CONS OF THIS STATEMENT.

BIG BUSINESS BRINGS A LOT OF BENEFITS TO THE COMMUNITY

Benefits Include:

-Maximize Sales and Profit:

*brings return on investment for the stakeholders.

*brings job opportunity for the community.

*brings better living for the job holders.

*brings more products for better lifestyle etc.

-Growth Path:

*career opportunties for many aspirants from the community.

-Collaboration and Productivity Enhancement:

*Big Business helps the employees work together and share lifestyle information.

-Easy to Use:

*Big Business helps the employees to learn/ develop themselves

with easy to use knowledge/skills.

-Value:

*Big Business helps to add value to your life by providing

resources support like superannuation.

-Advanced Technology:

*The latest technologies are integrated into Big Business to automate the entire business process and infrastructure and make you more productive. This enriches your life and your own knowledge.etc

CONS OF THIS STATEMENT-sometimes big business focus too much on finance and less on human resources

-Sometimes big business try to go for bigger profit at the cost of the consumer--some kind of exploitation.

- sometimes pay very little attention to the local community needs.

-sometimes exploits the workers.etc(b) Equality, justices and a respect for rights are characteristics of the American Economic System. Would you agree or disagree with this statement? Why?

Answer-The American economic system is a capitalist, free-market system, benefiting from the size and uniformity of the market, and resulting from its social and cultural systems. It is very competitive when scale matters, such as large industries, and often very creative in new industries. But with the relatively lowly educated American population, especially in matters of selling to other cultures, America will struggle to compete internationally.

The American economic system has many characteristics that are reasons for optimism. Here are three:

Ingenuity

No matter what some critics assert about "an America that's changed forever" or "an America on the verge of Armageddon," the U.S. remains one of the freest, fairest nations in the world -- and this has led to wave after wave of innovation. Critics speak of an America in the current and future decades not being conducive to business start-ups and entrepreneurs. Tell that to the hundreds of thousands of foreign citizens/businessowners who would jump at the chance at U.S. citizenship. This country will continue to attract talented, industrious, enterprising people from abroad and others pursuing their dreams, and many of these individuals will contribute to the innovation that will revitalize the U.S. economy.

ResiliencyAnother characteristic you can trace across centuries is the American economy's ability to adapt, reorganize and find new engines of growth. The early period of mechanization was supposed to lead to economic decline because all the local craftsmen who made things by hand were displaced. The rise of Japan's electronics industry in the 1960s and 1970s was supposed to do the same because the U.S. couldn't possibly survive without a domestic TV and radio manufacturing sector. Now it's the rise of China, India and other emerging nations that's supposed to lead to the great American decline. But investors will carefully note that during each period of structural change, the U.S economy adapted and retooled, workers retrained and new sectors were created where Americans performed value-added jobs.

Job MobilityAnother overlooked advantaged -- perhaps because the current recession has reduced its prevalence -- concerns job mobility. Among industrialized economies, U.S. workers are highly mobile. Of course, that has a big downside: Unless workers have a contract, companies can eliminate jobs quickly. But the reverse is also true: Employees can secure employment in better/more suitable positions more quickly than they can in many European economies. True, job scarcity and the excruciatingly high U.S. unemployment rate have reduced this natural flow of talent to its highest and best use. But that flow will increase again once the economy starts adding jobs in a sustained way.

The new U.S. health care system could further unleash this talent pool. Many professionals, blue-collar employees and others stay in their current job, not because it's their preference but because they get employer-provided health care. However, because the new system gives everyone the opportunity to buy health insurance at an affordable price, regardless of preexisting conditions, workers will likely feel much freer to pursue the most suitable employment. That could unlock creativity, increase productivity and spark a new wave of business start-ups.

So when you hear the dueling diatribes on 24-hour cable news shows, it's worth remembering that more people still want to come to the U.S. than to leave it. And that most international investors still consider the country an excellent place to invest their money. The reason is the American economic system itself.

Equality, justices and a respect for rights are provided by the economic system.BUT OFTEN THEY ARE MIS-REPRESENTED AND MIS-USED BY PEOPLE FROM BOTH SIDES OF THE EQUATION.

Q3(a) Do you agree with the claims that (i) future generations have no rights, and (ii) the future generations to which we have obligations actually include only the generation that will immediately succeed us? Explain your answer. If you do not agree with these claims, state your own views and provide arguments to support them

Answer- Future persons not have right claimsBecause

The Re-Population Paradox.(8)

The first objection must be treated briefly, though not because it can be easily and quickly disposed of.-argues that any effective attempts to "improve" the living conditions of the remote future will so alter "genetic shuffle" of future meetings, matings, and births, that such policies will, in fact, "repopulate" that future with different individuals. Accordingly, since none of the individuals in "Future A" will exist in ("improved") "Future B," no individual will be benefited ("made better off") as a result of this policy. It follows that since any attempts to "improve the future" will, strictly speaking, "benefit" no one, there are no obligations to future generations.(9)

And if there are no duties to the future, it follows that future generations have no rights

The Time-Span Argument against the rights-claims of posterity objects that duties and rights cannot meaningfully be said to hold over long periods of time and between persons with non-concurrent lives, who are thus denied reciprocal communication and interaction. But with this argument, time itself is the foremost reason for this moral disconnection.

Do long durations of time erode moral responsibilities? For the moment, consider, causal and epistemic connections through time, rather than moral connections. According to informed scientific opinion, some technological innovations and social policies enacted during the last few decades, and others now being contemplated, may result in both short-term advantages for some of our contemporaries, and devastating long-range effects for our successors. Such long-term effects, which are tied to their remote causes by quiet, continuing, and accumulating processes, are called, by ecologists, "time-lag effects." Consider some possible cases: First, the manufacture of thousands of nuclear weapons, and the decision to invest heavily in nuclear fission energy, has resulted in the production of highly toxic, long-lasting, radioactive by-products. Some of these substances (i.e., the actinides) must then be isolated from the biosphere for hundreds of thousands of years.(12)

If, in the intervening time, a geological event should cause the release of these materials into the biosphere, the results could be catastrophic. The "time-lag" between the disposal of these substances and their possible reappearance is unknown and unknowable.

The "No-Claims" Argument. Another common objection to the claim that future generations have rights, is that posterity, being "merely potential," is incapable of claiming these alleged rights. And without claims, it is argued, there can be no rights.

The Non-Actuality Argument. Among the most common objections against the rights of future generations is the contention that since posterity does not exist now, it makes no sense to speak of posterity having rights now.The ascription of rights is properly to be made to actual persons -- not possible persons. Since future generations can only be viewed as consisting of possible persons, from any vantage point at which the description "future generations" is applicable, it would follow . . . that rights cannot properly be ascribed to future generations."(18)The "non-actuality argument" might be subdivided into two interpretations: (a) the charge that posterity is "merely imaginary," and (b) the contention that posterity's rights apply only in posterity's own time. We will examine these points in order.

(a) There are no duties owed to imaginary persons.

(b) "Future generations . . . should correctly be said to have a right only to what is available when they come into existence, and hence when their possible future rights become actual and present."

The final objection to the notion of the rights of posterity might be called "the indeterminacy argument."While it is appropriate to ascribe rights to a class of persons, in general, such ascription is inappropriate when the class in question has no identifiable members. Now the class describable as "future generations" does not have any identifiable members -- no existing person or persons on whose behalf the specific right can be claimed to exist.

(b) Discuss the arguments for and against the 3 main theories of a producers duties to the customer. In your judgement, which theory is most adequate? Are there any marketing areas where one theory is more appropriate than the others?

Answer- Producers' Duties: Producers are obliged to place only safe products on the market. Within the limits of their respective activities, producers shall:

1.provide consumers with information to enable them to assess the risks inherent in a product throughout the normal or reasonably foreseeable period of its use, where such risks are not immediately obvious without adequate warnings, and to take precautions against those risks. Provision of such warnings does not, however, exempt any person from compliance with the other requirements in this Directive; and2.adopt measures commensurate with the characteristics of the products that they supply, to enable consumers to be informed of risks that these products might present and to take appropriate action, including, if necessary, withdrawing the product in question from the market.3.The measures include, for example, whenever appropriate:

*marking of the products or product batches in such a way that they can be identified;*sample testing of marketed products; and

*investigating complaints made and keeping distributors informed of such monitoring.

Pros

-these producer's duties helps the consumer

1. the right to safety;

2. the right to be informed;

3. the right to choose; and

4. the right to be heard

CONS-the implementation of the regulations is always questionable.-the monitoring is always shaky.

In your judgment which theory is most adequate?

3.The measures include, for example, whenever appropriate:

*marking of the products or product batches in such a way that they can be identified;

*sample testing of marketed products; and

*investigating complaints made and keeping distributors informed of such monitoring.

The producers can be partner in protecting the consumer rightsby adopting the following responsibility :- Quality of Material;- Safety and precision of material;- After sales service;- Training if needed;- Warranty and Gauranty to be properly implemented;- Insurance against non working or accident;- Businesses and Producers have responsibilities

RIGHT to expect laws and regulations to be essential and efficient-RESPONSIBILITY to provide safe products and services, information choice and a fair hearing-RESPONSIBILITY to practice and promote ethical marketplace behavior

Are there any marketing areas where one theory is more appropriate than other?3.The measures include, for example, whenever appropriate:*marking of the products or product batches in such a way that they can be identified;*sample testing of marketed products; and*investigating complaints made and keeping distributors informed of such monitoring.THIS THEORY CAN BE USED WITH THE MARKETING APPLICATIONS,LIKE-new product development.-customer service.

Q4(a) In your judgement was the historical shift in emphasis from intentional/ isolated discrimination to non-intentional/ institutionalized discrimination good or bad? Justify your statement

Answer- Action programs are means to bring about equal justice in several ways:(i) Prejudices which are not intentional but nonetheless widely shared and subtly institutionalized still operate to produce discriminatory results. Affirmative Action can counteract this situation.(ii) The lack of equal material opportunity as children--which has gotten worse, not better since the first edition of Velasquez's text in the early 1980's--results in unequal education and lack of equal opportunity as adults. Affirmative Action programs can counteract this.(iii) The lack of suitable role models (as a result of past discrimination) also undermines the possibility of adult success in oppressed groups. Affirmative Action can counteract this.Objection 1. Affirmative Action programs discriminate against white males. (To choose a woman or minority male when the white male applicant is equally or slightly more qualified is discrimination.)Response to Objection 1. It is not wrongful discrimination because it is not motivated by the assumption that the white male is inferior but by the assumption that otherwise the white male has an unfair advantage.Objection 2. Affirmative Action programs violate the fundamental principle of justice itself. Equals in the relevant respects should be treated equally.Response to Objection 2. In a society with a history of discrimination and a continuing legacy of discrimination black or female employes can contribute to society in a way that white males cannot. Just as some people are chosen for some jobs (TV news anchor, say) because of their good looks (largely an inherited quality beyond one's control), so other people may be chosen for jobs because they can be much needed a role model for black or female youth. This would cause real ethical problems only if race or gender were to be the sole or primary qualifi-cation, or if the results of past discrimination had been finally overcome.Other arguments for Affirmative Action are less effective.1. Compensatory Justice. People have an obligation to compensate those whom they have injured. (Some, but not all, and perhaps not the oldest traditions, say intentionally injured.) The dominant groups in society have injured minorities and women; therefore they have a duty to compensate these groups.Objection to 1. Compensatory justice applies to individuals not to groups. The people being "compensated" by Affirmative Action are usually not the individuals most injured by past discrimination. Discrimination as a past practice was unfair, but present members of the same group have no right to compensation because of what was done to people now dead. Also, Affirmative Action helps mainly those members of the minority or female group who already fairly well off (most of the time a minority or female applicant has to be more or less tied with other applicants before Affirmative Action gives the individuals an edge), and these are just the individuals whom discrimination has injured the least.2. Utilitarian Argument for Affirmative Action as a Means to Achieve Greater Public Welfare. In this case, the end (reducing poverty, a sense of helplessness and lack of self-esteem, social division, etc.) justifies the means (giving female and minority applicants a slight edge when they are competing with members of other groups for similar jobs).Criticism of 2. Should we give up Affirmative Action programs if the total social happiness produced by them is outweighed by the social unhappiness produced by them? Utilitarian reasoning would seem to justify that decision. That would imply that if members of the dominant group felt injured sufficiently by Affirmative Action programs, then such programs would have to be curtailed. Affirmative Action defenders would respond that this allows the privileged group to demand that their possible loss of an unjust advantage be treated as more important than the injured group's reacquisition of equality.(b) Kohlbergs views on moral development show that the more morally mature a person becomes, the more likely it is that the person will obey the moral norms of his or her society. DiscussAnswer- Kohlberg's theory argues that just as a child grows up and develops physically, people as moral beings also grow up and develop. He argues that humans who fully grow up morally progress upward in three levels, and each level has two stages. However, it seems that this statement is true until a person progresses to the 5th and 6th level. People who operate out of the third level of Kohlberg's moral standards may not be perceived by society as being as morally obedient as those who only progress to the fourth stage on the second level. In the first level, which he calls the "preconventional stages" young humans are motivated to do what's right because either they want certain rewards or want to avoid certain punishments (Punishment and Obedience Orientation). Children do what's right, not because they understand it will hurt others if they don't, but just because they don't want to be punished. The second stage in this first level is called the "instrumental and relative orientation" stage (38). In this stage, the child is practical in a way. The child might think, "I won't do X to my brother, because I don't want my brother to do X to me." Kohlberg argues that there are some grownups that get stuck on level one (in either stages one or two) because they never progress beyond their fear of punishment or loss of reward, while there are other adults who behave a certain way to avoid someone doing something the same to them. If a person gets stuck in either stage of level one, his/her moral reasoning will always function on this level motivated out of fear

Level two is called by Kohlberg the "conventional stages". In the first level of this development of ethics a young adolescence does what's right because they are being loyal to their family, friends or ethnic group or they do what's right because they have a duty or allegiance to the law. I have seen that most middle class Americans get stuck right here. These are the good citizens of the society. In the first stage, the "interpersonal concordance orientation," a person does what they believe is right so that they will be loyal to and approved of by the people who they value. This is a good stage for an adolescent if they are in good company. However, we can see this in a negative or deviant way too: kids who are loyal to their gang members, suicide packs or pregnancy packs that teens take with other teens to do terrible things together, mafia families in which teens choose to cooperate with their family's illegal acts over what they know is right. However, if teens have a good family background this can be a blessing that they do what's right because they want to be well thought of and accepted by their families and the society. In the second level a loyalty to the society, nation and law develops. There is a sense of group and community that if they don't honor, they will not fit well or be a responsible member of the group. Overall, I guess that most government officials are very pleased if people get here and remain here. They would not call it "stuck" if a person's conduct and motivation stayed right here.

Kohlberg then describes a final level with two stages of maturity. This of course should happento everyone .After reading this,I had to even reflect on myself to see if I have progressed beyond level two/stage four as a Christian male and as a Cuban American Having come from Cuba, I know so many people who come to this country and because there was a mindset of poverty

and government blame, many people I know, even my family members, may be stuck on level one in stage one or stage two. I thought because I value obeying the laws and I don't want to shame my family name, My Savior, or the country that took me in and gave me the chance to be productive and an entrepreneur, I thought this was a high level of development. But now I see stages five, "social contract orientation" and stage six "universal moral principles orientation" and I realize that these are both in the Bible. And furthermore, if you live them, you actually may be considered dangerous to the existing power structure as Jesus and the Apostle Paul were considered dangerous to the Jewish leaders of that time.

In stage five, a person realizes that reasonable people disagree over what is right and try to reach "a consensus" to achieve change or action. I think that when the Greeks came up with the first democratic system involving the city state - one man, one vote, this was a reflection of this kind of ethical system that recognizes that conflicting moral views are best settled by a vote that allowed majority ruling. Of course the American system is much more complex than this now with the Electoral College and the weight each state has in an election, but the basis of the Greek's ancient system is still in place. But the best example I saw of this in the Bible was in John chapter 8. In this chapter Jesus responds out of this level of ethics. The Pharisees brought Jesus a woman who was caught in adultery. They brought her, and not the man, to see if Jesus would uphold their law and stone her to death. They created this dilemma to accuse him of not being loyal to their group or not obeying the known law of that day (stages three and stages four of Kohlberg's model). However, Jesus, being more developed ethically because He always operated out of eternal/universal principles of virtue, brought them to a point of consensus that made each of them agree to walk away from the situation. He told them, whoever of you is without sin, you cast the first stone at her (John 8:7). From the oldest to the youngest, they all walked away. This was a kind of consensus. He even got the woman to walk away by showing her that her level of moral standards failed her - "Woman, where are your accusers? Does no man accuse you?" (John 8:10) She probably was motivated only by stage one, level one: she did not want to be caught and punished. In that day, violating marriage laws meant death by stoning.In stage six, " universal moral principles of orientation" a person who has developed to this level behaves out of a moral certainty because he is sure that the principles he follows are reasonable, universal and consistent (Velasquez, 39). Usually on this level, the person acts wholly out of these beliefs and is able to analyze and reason out of this level of moral development. Most people guess that only moral superstars of the human race are able to attain this. However, I guess along with people who have died for their principles, there are many unknown heroes who act in a daily way out of their convictions and ability to act in universal, rationale ways in spite of what it may cost them. If we are looking, we have seen this over and over again during crisis situations all throughout history. An example of this, for Christians, is shown when Jesus is dying on the cross. He asks His Father to forgive those who were crucifying Him: Forgive them Father, for they know not what they do (Luke 23:34). He chose this because He chose to treat "people as a (eternal) end in themselves"(Velasquez, 39). He saw from His Father's perspective that this was "reasonable, universal and consistent" with what He was sent here to do.

Q5(a) In view of the contractual agreement that every employee makes to be loyal to the employer, do you think whistleblowing is ever morally justified? Explain.

Answer-''In view of contractual agreement that every employee makes to be loyal to the Employer''THIS IS NOT TRUE. THE CONTRACT IS NOT FOR LOYALTY The employment relationship is a legal notion widely used in countries around the world to refer to the relationship between a person called an "employee" (frequently referred to as "a worker") and an "employer", for whom the employee performs work under certain conditions in return for remuneration. It is through the employment relationship, however defined, that reciprocal rights and obligations are created between the employee and the employer. The employment relationship has been, and continues to be, the main vehicle through which workers gain access to the rights and benefits associated with employment in the areas of labour law and social security. It is the key point of reference for determining the nature and extent of employers' rights and obligations towards their workers. Is there an employment relationship?

There are a number of key elements to establishing if an employment relationship exists between two parties.A contract of employment exists where an offer of employment at a given rate of pay has been accepted. The terms of a contract may be verbal, written, implied, or a combination of all three. Some types of contracts, for example for an apprentice, are required by law to be in writing.

A contract of employment will come into existence as soon as employees start work and by doing so, demonstrate that they accept the job on the terms offered by the employer.

An employment relationship, established by a contract of employment, places certain rights and obligations on employers and employees. Some of these obligations will have been expressly stated in the contract itself, either verbally or in writing, and others are legal obligations that come from legislation, awards or agreements or from common-law employment principles. For example, employers must comply with State and federal laws in relation to pay rates, working conditions, taxation, workers compensation, occupational safety and health, equal opportunity and superannuation, in addition to any agreed conditions in the contract.If there is no employment relationship established, most of these laws will not apply. This would be the case with a volunteer, a trial worker or a subcontractor. However, as each piece of legislation provides a different definition of employees or workers, it is important that employers check which obligations they have in each particular circumstance.

Employment law also regulates the nature of pay and conditions within a contract of employment. Any condition agreed to is invalid if it conflicts with a legal requirement. A worker is more likely an employee and not an independent contractor if the worker:1. Is required to comply with the employers instructions about the work.2. Receives training from the employer.3. Provides services that are integrated into the business.4. Provides services that must be rendered personally.5. Hires, supervises and pays assistants for the employer.6. Has a continuing relationship with the employer.7. Follows set hours of work.8. Works full-time for the employer9. Works on the employers premises.10. Does the work in a sequence set by the employer.11. Submits regular reports to the employer.12. Receives payments of regular amounts at set intervals.13. Receives payments for business or traveling expenses.14. Relies on the employer to furnish tools and materials.15. Lacks a major investment in facilities used to perform the service.16. Cannot make a profit or suffer a loss from the services.17. Works for one employer at a time.18. Does not offer services to the general public.19. Can be fired20. Can quit at any time without liability.Duties and Obligations of Employees

* To work

Employees must be ready, willing and able to perform their job as specified in their employment agreements.

*To obey instructions

Employees must obey instructions so long as the instructions are lawful, are not dangerous, and are within the scope of their employment agreement.

*To take care

Under the Health and Safety in Employment Act employees are also required to ensure a safe working environment. They must also take care not to damage the employers property and equipment.

*To show fidelity

There are many ways in which courts have held that employees have breached this duty.

Employees can not :

work for their employer's competitors in their own time.

use information gained at work for personal gain or disclose the employer's confidential information unless it is anact of whistleblowing.

fail to report misconduct by other employees

do anything in their free time to damage the reputation of their employer. Many employees have been fired for committing crimes that were unrelated to their job.

try to take away an employer's customers for when they go into business for themselves. COMPENSATION PACKAGE FROM THE EMPLOYEES' PERSPECTIVE Compensation is typically among the first things potential employees consider when looking for employment. After all, for employees, compensation is the equivalent not to how they are paid but, ultimately, to how they are valued. What is a compensation package?

It's easy to think "dollars per hour" when thinking about compensation. Successful compensation packages,however, are more like a total rewards system, containing non-monetary, direct and indirect elementsNon-Monetary Compensation can include any benefit an employee receives from an employer or job that does not involve tangible value. This includes career and social rewards such as job security, flexible hours and opportunity for growth, praise and recognition, task enjoyment and friendships.Direct compensation is an employee's base wage. It can be an annual salary, hourly wage or any performancebased pay that an employee receives, such as profit-sharing bonuses. Indirect Compensation is far more varied, including everything from legally required public protection programs such as Social Security to health insurance, retirement programs, paid leave, child care or housing.Employers have a wide variety of compensation elements from which to choose. By combining many of these compensation alternatives, progressive mangers can create compensation packages that are as individual as the employees who receive them. The general consensus of recent studies is that pay should be tied to performance to be effective. However, with traditional BUSINESS operations, that is not easily done. Business performance can be affected by many factors over which employees have no influence, specificallyEXTERNAL ENVIRONMENT . Successful managers must search for things employees influence and base performance objectives on these areas. Your operation may benefit from the following: tenure bonuses for long-time employees, equipment repair incentives to encourage good equipment maintenance, or bonuses for arriving to work on time.

The more production information data your business has, the easier this is to accomplish. Direct Compensation Alternatives Basic Pay: Cash wage paid to the employee. Because paying a wage is a standard practice, the competitive advantage can only come by paying a higher amount.

Incentive Pay: A bonus paid when specified performance objectives are met. May inspire employees to set and achieve a higher performance level and is an excellent motivator to accomplish BUSINESS goals

Stock Options: A right to buy a piece of the business which may be given to an employee to reward excellent service. An employee who owns a share of the business, is far more likely to go the extra mile for the operation. Bonuses: A gift given occasionally to reward exceptional performance or for special occasions. Bonuses can show an employer appreciates his/her employees and ensures that good performance or special events are rewarded.(b) In your judgment, is it wrong, from an ethical point of view, for the auto companies to submit plans for an automobile to China? Explain your answer.

Answer-

Q6(a) Utilitarianism is the view that so long as an action provides with more measurable economic benefits than costs, the action is morally right. Identify all of the mistakes contained in this definition of utilitarianism

Answer-

(b) Any pollution law is unjust because it necessarily violates peoples right to liberty and right to property. Discuss.

Answer- Pollution is the contamination of air, water, or earth by harmful substances. Concern for pollution developed alongside concerns for the environment in general. The advent of automobiles, increased chemical wastes, nuclear wastes, and accumulation of garbage in landfills created a need for legislation specifically aimed at decreasing pollution.

POLLUTION WERE DAMAGING THE HEALTH OF THE PEOPLE

AND THE HEALTH OF THE COUNTRY. HENCE THE POLLUTION LAWS

ARE NECESSARY EVILS, WHICH WILL HELP/ MANAGE THOSE

WHO ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE POLLUTION.

Among the landmark acts designed to preserve our environment is the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act

-a comprehensive regulatory statute aimed at controlling solid waste disposal.

-The Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 aims to safely dispose of nuclear wastes.

-The Clear Air Act was first enacted in 1970, it was later amended in 1977 and again in 1990; with its present formembodied in. Like this examples demonstrate, most environmental regulations are federal in nature. Among the types of pollution, the one that has existed longer than any other is water pollution. Its consequences are readily seen when pollutants reach groundwater reservoirs, creating serious health hazards to people drinking the water. The current version of the Federal Clean Water Act is another tool.

environmental law: an overview

THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT [NEPA]

THE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY IMPROVEMENT ACT

THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION ACT

THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA]

were passed in 1970.

The main objective of these federal enactments was to assure that the environment be protected against both public and private actions that failed to take account of costs or harms inflicted on the eco-system.The EPA is supposed to monitor and analyze the environment, conduct research, and work closely with state and local governments to devise pollution control policies. NEPA has been described as one of Congress's most far reaching environmental legislation ever passed. The basic purpose of NEPA is to force governmental agencies to consider the effects of their decisions on the environment.State laws also reflect the same concerns and common law actions allow adversely affected property owners to seek a judicial remedy for environmental harms.

THESE LAWS DO NOT violate people right to liberty and right to property.

ON THE CONTRARY, THESE LAWS SAVES THE LIVES OF MANYAND ALSO THE FUTURE GENERATION.

Page 2