Essay, Pages 10 (2342 words)
The ethicality of the executives or any employee lies in honesty and truthfulness in performing duties delegated to that person and not indulging intentionally hoodwink others by embellishment, partial truths, careful omissions, etc·
The executives and employees rely on integrity from within that calls for courage to the right thing even if it means to swim against the tides. These people are honorable, upright and well principled. They will not give up the right they do even if how hard it is to live by those principles.
Promise-keeping & trustworthiness.
Ethical people are trust worthy. They are ever ready to provide information that is relevant and apt they even provide correction to any misinterpretation occurred in the facts, they take great zeal to keep up the promises and commitments that they have made. They do no create justifications in order to escape from their commitments.
Ethical people are trustworthy, they are true demonstration of loyalty to others and institutions through support and devotion to duty; they do not reveal any information that is confidential for personal gain.
They make independent professional judgments by conscientiously avoiding unwarranted influences and conflicts of interest.
Their loyalty is exemplified in their companies and among their colleagues and if they choose to accept the offer of another employer, they provide rational notice in order to respect the confidential information of their former employer, and refuse to engage in any activities that take undue advantage of their previous positions.
Ethical people are fair and just in all dealings; they do not exercise power randomly, and do not use unfair means to gain or maintain any advantage.
Fair people manifest a commitment to justice, the equality among individuals, tolerance for and acceptance to changes, they are open-minded; they willing admit their mistakes.
Misusing company time
Whether it is covering for someone who shows up late or altering a time sheet, misusing company time tops the list. This group includes knowing that one of your co-workers is conducting personal business on company time.
Too many workplaces are filled with managers and supervisors who use their position and power to mistreat or disrespect others. Unfortunately, unless the situation you’re in involves race, gender or ethnic origin, there is often no legal protection against abusive behavior in the workplace.
According to a recent study by Jack L. Hayes International, one out of every 40 employees in 2012 was caught stealing from their employer. Even more startling is that these employees steal on average 5.5 times more than shoplifters ($715 vs $129). Employee fraud is also on the uptick, whether its check tampering, not recording sales in order to skim, or manipulating expense reimbursements.
Lying to employees
This has been a common practice among employees and they feel as mostly all do so they can also lie. It is the easiest way to lose the trust of your employees, yet employers do it all the time. One of out every five employees report that their manager or supervisor has lied to them within the past year.
Violating company internet policies
Cyber slackers, Cyber loafers, these are terms used to identify people who surf the Web when they should be working. It’s a major problem for most the companies. A survey conducted recently by Salary.com found that every day at least 64 percent of employees visit websites that have nothing to do with their work.
Employee theft can be considered as an illegal practice. Any form of theft comes under a criminal record and the company that has such an employee that is caught under such unethical practice can face criminal charges by the superiors of the company.
Employee theft is the stealing of goods, money or time by the people who work for you, such as employees or contractors. To prevent employee theft, we need to find out what all ways are possible or factor that can lead to employee theft. Then according to the above factor a company can decide the policies, processes and monitoring system.
Employment at Will at Howmet Corporation
No, companies like Howmet Corporation or any other company should not have the right to fire employees without a good or proper reason because a company selects a candidate from a list of candidates who had applied for job in that company.
When an employee is selected he feels that he will be treated properly and not be fired if there is no proper or good reason and feels that he is safe and also that he can give his best to the company.
His total income is also dependent on his salary he is paid by the company. Thus no company has the right to fire an employee without having a proper reason.
As it was stated in the handbook No employee will be terminated without a `proper cause or reason and not until management has made a careful review of the facts.’
Also when Nancy asked her supervisor that she wanted to resign, her supervisor said that the company would not fire her without a proper reason and that she was in line for further promotions. Thus we can conclude that Nancy’s first supervisor had given Nancy the right not to be fired without a proper or good reason as was stated in the handbook.
When an employer employee a person for a job it is his moral duty that he takes all the necessary steps required for the safety of that employee. It is also his duty to provide the employee with the basic requirements like food, shelter, etc.
The employer should also inform the employee the hazards of the job. Thus in my view, Domino’s Delivery Policy is morally justified.
Yes the companies must hire policies that help the delivery people to be safe while delivering pizzas. The pizza companies should offer delivery boys with compact cars instead of motorcycles or cycles this can reduce the chances of getting into an accident for being attacked by people. The compact cars could have a tracking device that connects the car to the company as well as the nearest police station in the locality where the delivery boy is going to deliver the pizza.
The companies can also advice their customers to come and collect their delivery from the delivery boys at their cars, it is because the chances the delivery boys being attacked are reduced and the car acts as a barrier for the same. Customers can also use E Payment methods for payment so as to reduce the liquid cash in the hands of delivery boys and the chance of being robbed.
Thus by using these means they can protect the delivery workers and also retain the customer satisfaction.
San Francisco’s decision regarding the delivery is quite questionable as it has both positive as well as negative effects.
Positive effects are according to the federal law all sorts of discrimination, racism, etc. are abolished and in case of this delivery issue the company unintentionally discriminates people based on three different colour codes which are red, yellow, green the company’s policies to make the employees safe has raised to you and unintentional discrimination among people.
Negative aspect of this insurance done by San Francisco is that at the companies during that time done his sort of division is because of the crime rates in the country they would like to keep their employees safe because the employees do these things for a living due to the increased crime rates during the period of time the company had no choice but to do division with the help of colour codes.
The duty to comply
the consumer shall have the right to request that the business delete any sort of information about the consumer which the business has collected.
A business that collects personal information about consumers shall disclose , pursuant to subparagraph of paragraph (5) of subdivision (a) of section 1798.
A business that receives a verifiable request from a consumer to delete consumers personal information pursuant to subdivision (a) of this section shall delete consumers personal information from its records or direct any service providers to delete the consumers personal information from their records.
The duty of Disclosure
Under section 2 of the Act, it is the duty of the consumer to take reasonable care not to make a misrepresentation to the insurer before the contract is entered into or varied. … This modifies the consumer’s duty of utmost good faith by removing the obligation to disclose all material facts.
The duty not to misrepresent
Misinterpretation makes freedom of choice impossible.
Misinterpretation is coercive
A person who purposely misleads acts as a liar, wants the person to act and not as the person would have chosen freely to act ,if the person had known the truth.
The duty to exercise due care
The due care theory of the manufacturer’s duties to consumers is based on the idea that consumers and sellers do not meet as equals and the consumer’s interests are particularly vulnerable to being harmed by the manufacturer, who has a knowledge and an expertise that the consumer lacks. Because manufacturers are in a more advantaged position, they have a duty to take special care to ensure that the products they offer do not harm the consumers’ interests .
The doctrine of caveat emptor is here replaced with a weak version of the doctrine of cave a vendor. Let the seller take care. Because consumers must rely on the expertise of the manufacturer, they have a duty not only to deliver a product that lives up to the express and implied claims they make about it.
They have a duty to exercise due care to prevent others from being injured by the product, even if they explicitly disclaim such responsibility. Due care must enter into the product’s design, choice of materials and construction methods, quality control, and warnings attached to it. Failure to exercise due care in these areas is abreach of the manufacturer’s moral duties.
This theory rests on the principle that agents have amoral duty not to harm or injure others. The principle can be defended by the ethics of care, of course, but rule utilitarianism, Kant, and Rawls can all also be used as a solid basis for the theory.
Brown and Williamson hip- hop promotion, and the cigarette ads in general must be banned.
Let us admit the truth the ads created by any company for selling any product or service is very attractive, convincing and alluring.
The main of any ad is to entice the public to the product or service. This gives a clear understanding of the how the ads of Brown and Williamson, and other cigarettes work.
The ads by these cigarette companies are promoting the teens to buy and use them is through the process of imprinting and impression creating. Through the repeated broadcasting of these ads over television, social media, internet, and other medias the ads creators are imprinting the cool factor’ and the wow factor’ that they are advertising through these ads to teens who are craving for the same.
In the same way the companies are also creating the ads in order to create an impression among the teens of being cool and stand out of the crowd as the coolest teen in the smallest group to the largest group possible.
Even after these things if the teen is not allured, at least the teen will try their cigarette due to persuasion created during the repeated broadcasts. The pressure that is been exerted by the ads on any person is very high, in this case even after pictorially depicting the possible dangers of smoking, the sales are on higher scale.
The other part of the ad is directed to the teens that do not resort to cigarettes; these ads deteriorate the self-confidence and self-esteem of these teens by projecting them as teens with no cool factor’ and wow factor’, because they do not use cigarettes.
The above reasons may be small, but when magnified on large scale of teens the impact is very high.
The weak point of the teens are how cool could they be among their groups? This part is been exploited by the ad creators in an extensive manner so that the teens would be allured to cigarettes at a rate that is not imaginable. Hence the cigarette commercials must be banned.
The three theories on the ethical duties of manufacturers imply that cigarettes are unethical products.
The three theories on the ethical duties of manufacturers are
Contract theory- according to this theory all business relationships are on the basis of contracts among the manufacturer and the consumer. In case of cigarettes there are no contractual agreements among the manufacturers and consumers.
Due care theory- according to this theory the consumer’s interest for not being harmed due to the manufacturer products. The manufacturers have a special duty to take care to prevent others from injury due their product although they disclaim such responsibilities.
The cigarette manufacturers do not care about the health conditions that are caused to the consumes due to smoking they also do not care about the health conditions caused to others due to passive smoking. Although they disclose the health hazards caused due to smoking truly disclaim any caused due to smoking or passive smoking.
Social cost theory- according to this theory the manufacturers of the product must pay towards the customers for any injury or health hazard caused due to the malfunction of the product or error in the production of the product. Although in the labels of the cigarette packets standardized quantities of the different materials used in the manufacturing of one cigarette in the Pack is mentioned the errors caused in the manufacture of other cigarettes in the Pack ( if there are any) are totally being neglected.
Hence any health hazard caused due to these cigarettes are been totally rejected by the company and the claims are turned down from promptly.