Exxon Valdez – Continuing Case Essay
Exxon Valdez – Continuing Case
Many years ago, Raymond Baumhart the greatest sociologist questioned organization people, “What does ethics mean to the business world?” Some people believe that Ethics is a kind of feeling which would give the knowledge about right or wrong situation on the basis of religious beliefs. While other argues the prior view admitting that it simply the level of behaviour society accepts and the law requires. “Ethics is a study of moral standards whose explicit purpose is to determine as far as possible whether a given moral standard is more or less correct (Manuel G. Velasquez, 2006)” Standpoint
March 24, 1989, one of the Exxon Valdez, a loaded oil tanker with 52 million gallons crude oil runs in Prince William Sound, spilling 11 million gallons of oil. The government was strongly feeling about the environmental damage, to the fishery and the life of people involved there. Output
That was bad luck for the wildlife, approximately 30,000 birds and 2000 sea others lost their lives. More than $2 billion spent just to clean it up and paid millions of dollar to the fishermen. Ethically, Exxon lost image in the world and about 40,000 credit cards destroyed in protest. Ethical Issues
It was truly horrific, the longer that marine animal is setting in oil the more they were dealing with death. Consumers lost their faith in Exxon and faced opposition from the world. The affected area has not fully recovered. The control over the ethical situation
This was the worst environmental disaster America has ever faced. After a week, CEO Lawrence Rawls wrote apology note in all newspapers. In addition they began cleanup immediately after the situation occurred.
Many of the ethical issues and dilemmas in international business are rooted in the fact that political systems and laws differ from nation to nation. In the international business setting, the most common ethical issue involve employment practices and corruption. According to the given case of Castle & Cook, “whistle-blower” would be able to file the lawsuit in a federal court. The plaintiffs alleged claims under the violation of the “Foreign Corrupt Practices Act” The jurisdiction in this case can enable the person thus empowered to act towards, and in what manner this power may be exercised. In Subject matter jurisdiction thus empowers “whistle-blower” to act toward certain kinds of legal questions, whereas in Personal jurisdiction, the foreign country employee lives out of state, the court must look at the contacts with the state. Going into a state regularly to conduct business is usually sufficient for the court to obtain jurisdiction. (The ‘Lectric Law Library,2014)
The Laws That Govern the Securities Industry. (n.d.). Retrieved September 4, 2014, from http://www.sec.gov/about/laws.shtml The ‘Lectric Law Library’s Lexicon Personal Jurisdiction, Retrieved September 4, 2014, from (http://www.lectlaw.com/def2/p211.htm) http://crab.rutgers.edu/~sambhary/International%20Bussiness%20Environment/notes/IBe%20Ch%2004%20Ethics.pdf
In 1989, the Exxon Valdez tanker spilled nearly 11 million gallons of oil around the cost of Alaska; it caused one of the worst oil spills in the United States history. The Exxon Valdez continues to suffer from last 25 years and still paying off for the incident. The Exxon was to be sued by many individuals and businesses within state or federal court as required, as per the administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, for the Environmental regulations law comes under both state and federal court. Some company sued under the law of business losses within the federal court. Sea Hawk Sea foods, Inc, having a seafood processing business on Prince William Sound in Valdez, Alaska sued the Exxon shipping company under the law of business losses.
The court dismissed the case with the advice of federal admiralty law (9th Cir.1994). Fishing industry filed the complaint again Exxon. In 1994, the Exxon was initially ordered to pay $5 billion by federal court, which was reduced in federal appeal in 2006 to $2.5 billion. In 2008, The United States Supreme court had decided to cut down the damage by $500 million as Exxon has already spent approximately $2 billion for cleanup and recovery (New York Times, 2010). The Exxon shipping co continues with the lesson, even after paying all these damages and standing for a long time in the federal and Supreme Court of the United States.
The district court also removed more than 160 other state law cases relating to the oil spillEyak Native Vill. v. Exxon Corp., 25 F.3d 773, 774 (9th Cir.1994) Retrieved September 5, 2014, from (http://openjurist.org/484/f3d/1098/in-re-the-exxon-valdez) New York Times, Exxon Valdez Oil Spill (1989), August 3, 2010 07-219Exxon Shipping Co. v. Baker (2/27/08), Retrieved September 5, 2014, from (http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/07-219.pdf)