It's very complex, because ethical and social responsibility changes from country to country: what is ethical in one country may not be in another, and a global business must take this into account.
If nothing else, they must at least know and follow the law of each country in which they do business.
2006-07-28 06:52:44
·
answer #1
·
answered by Rjmail 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
A corporation on any scale should be legally obligated to clean up any messes it makes and set the environment back to at least as good condition as they found it. Nobody has the right to force others to suffer from pollution or environmental degredation.
On the other hand, I don't see the problem with "sweatshops."
At first I did, back when I thought that the sweatshop workers were prevented from ever leaving their factories, i.e., back when I thought they were being held captive, much as inmates in a prison are held captive.
But I've since found out that sweatshop workers are NOT held captive. They can leave. If they leave without the factory manager's permission, they might be fired and not let back on the factory's premises.
It's true that the working conditions are miserable. It's true that the pay is very bad.
It's also true that each of the workers can, if he or she so chooses, walk away and live their lives quite as though that factory over there did not exist in their world.
If the factory's owner had not chosen to buy land and build a factory there, whatever would its unhappy workers be doing instead? WELL LET THEM GO DO IT!
On the other hand, a sweatshop owner who permits unsafe conditions that result in workers getting hurt or killed should be held responsible. Fully so, not just tokenly so.
If there's a fire and workers die because it's policy for the store manager to lock the workers in during business hours, then the owner should be criminally liable for manslaughter and, in a civil suit, held liable for paying to the families of each of the dead workers a court award amounting to at least what the worker might have earned during the entire rest of his life.
It's important that the criminal penalty be enforced against the actual man or woman who owns the sweatshop where unsafe working conditions resulted in workers' deaths. You'll never get rich people to change their ways until you start laying hard hands upon their actual, physical rich-person bodies and making them suffer as they made others suffer.
2006-07-28 07:11:34
·
answer #2
·
answered by David S 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
it is true that the laws of the land matter very much. it is also very true, that the culture of the society you live in is extremely significant. but if your question refers to ethics and social responsibility of corporations in a global scenario, there are universal rules to be found in business ethics. the problem is that most people will say that these may not be applicable due to civil laws and culture. but civil laws in any democratic country must be created for the respect and the dignity of the person in a societal context... what culture does not respect the dignity of the persons in its communities? if you have an open mind and really want to learn, and the people you are dealing with are the same, then i suggest you visit the acton institute website. csr can be global, if persons-workers and consumers- are not considered mere instruments of profit, but person with equal dignity, regardless of race, religion, gender, political affiliation, and all those labels that we sometimes place on ourselves...all for the sake of profit, and the excuse of civil laws and culture. also. there is an encylical by karol wojtila (he was also known as pope john paul 11) who also happens to be a brilliant philosopher. it is entitled "laborem exercens." you may want to read this if you truly want a universal answer. you don't have to be catholic...just desiring to learn.
2006-07-28 07:13:43
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Any company in a foreign country should always abide and comply with the laws of that country, be aware of the working culture, traditions, beliefs of the people who will work for them and try to find out if company policies need to be adjusted or retained to suit the employees. The company should also be respectful of the environment they will be in because they will need to use the available resources of that country. Its often called due diligence.
2006-07-28 06:58:20
·
answer #4
·
answered by Equinox 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well, if you look at the earnings of Exxon this past quarter, I'd say they are slim to none.
2006-07-28 06:50:21
·
answer #5
·
answered by pezdispenserwisdom 3
·
0⤊
0⤋