Question

Consider the following scenario:

Mick is a strategic planner for Dorrian International, a multinational firm that owns and manages tea plantations in developing countries. Dorrian's advertising emphasizes the firm's "partnership with the developing world." In recent weeks, Dorrian has been the subject of a series of critical articles in The New York Times. The articles contain detailed information about the pay and conditions on the plantations, describing the pay as exploitative and the work conditions as inhumane. The Times has also commented unfavorably on the arrangements Dorrian has made with these countries' governments for the repatriation of profits.

The information in the articles has been accurate. It is also so detailed that it could only be coming from someone inside Dorrian. Dorrian has a company policy stating that employees "must not disclose commercial information to unauthorized persons," and another policy which says that "all contacts with the press must be handled by the properly authorized officers."

At a social function, Ebony, a member of your department, inadvertently makes it clear that she's the one who has been supplying the information to the newspaper. She immediately recognizes what she has done. Ebony says to Mick, "You must ignore what I've said or I'll be finished." Mick replies, "Then I guess you're finished. Unlike you, I follow the rules. I also know what my obligations are and one of them is to my company. I'm loyal to Dorrian, and I'll be reporting you first thing tomorrow morning."

State whether or not you believe Mick’s position is ethical and, using relevant ideas and material from this business ethics course, defend your position. To defend your position successfully, you will need to anticipate how an opponent might object to your position and provide convincing responses to the opponent’s arguments. Aim to address yourself to strong arguments an opponent might make rather than weak arguments that can be refuted easily.

Answer 1

Mick’s position is very unethical and Ebony has just blown the whistle. Mick as a strategic planner should have warned the company about the conditions in which workers in the developing country work and the low payment they receive. Utilitarian Ethics suggests that an act should maximize the benefit to maximum number of people and reduce any harm but in the case of Ebony, she has brought the news to the outer world which might help the tea estate workers thus maximizing the benefits to maximum number of people. Mick on the other hand is trying to suppress the information thus would continue to treat those work in the estates inhumanely. He has also tried to bribe the governments in order to maintain his fraudulent and unhuman treatment on the labors in the estates.

Thank you for your question. Please rate if you like the answer.