English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

.....advocates for corporate responsibility cannot seem to agree :
a) on what social responsibility involves.
b) who should be the watchdog to police business behavior.
c) if all businesses, large and small, should be held to the same standards.
d) if politicians should be held to the same standards of behavior.

2006-09-17 10:35:14 · 3 answers · asked by Paul G 1 in Business & Finance Corporations

3 answers

We can see from historical trends that when businesses are subjected to a legally authorized taking of their assets to benefit others, those with the authority tend to favor others of their own political alignment.

I believe the best plan is to 'appeal' to businesses to contribute, as the United Way and UNICEF do, rather than empower someone to take from them.

Regarding dumping of harmful pollutants or other damaging behaviors, that certainly falls under the purview of the laws against directly harming others.

2006-09-17 10:43:20 · answer #1 · answered by speakeasy 6 · 0 0

Great questions. Let me try my 2 cents worth.

1. Social responsibilities....in America the social contract between the employee and employer has long disappeared. In its place, we have the HR department and sometimes the Unions. As a result, it is "me against you". The mutual loyalty to each other is not here anymore. So as Michael Coreone said, "it is only business, nothing personal". Until that relation is changed, I doubt any real progress will take place.

2. To what degree our mutual responsibilities should be? That depends on the degree of co-operations between the two. I came from the orient. As I was growing up, our driver's son went to the same school as I. When his father died, we continued to pay his mother and we put him through college. When he was done, he never thought of working for another company but ours and we never thought of him not getting a job unless he wanted to go some where else. Sure there are pros and cons about that. There are no perfect systems.

3. Who should police business behavior... in the perfect world, we should not need policeman if everyone plays by the rules. But we are not perfect are we. The answer lies on the moral standard of the general citizens at large. The business leaders, the politicians, the teachers, the priests, they all come from us, the genreral citizenship. The recent problems are merely the symptoms of the gradual decline of our moral fiber as a society much like the disintegration of our social contract between business and its employees. We are the watch dogs and we have not done a very good job until it hit the fan with the likes of Enron. You are only seeing the tip of the iceberg. We all probably have somehow directly or indirectly help all these along. If we can turn that around, peer pressure will help minimize the need for a police state. But then may be I am too idealistic.

2006-09-17 13:42:59 · answer #2 · answered by robert S 4 · 0 0

I think people generally agree on how it should work in a perfect world. But when these things start to cost money and, God forbid, impinge on anybody's freedom, that's when the heated arguments start.

2006-09-17 10:38:03 · answer #3 · answered by I Know Nuttin 5 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers