Ethics and Corporate Responsibility in the Workplace and the World

Ethics and Corporate Responsibility in the Workplace and the World

Stakeholders

Analysis of the present scenario identifies stakeholders from disciplines including customers (buyers and patients), CompCARE employees and workers, government and related agencies, hospitals and physicians, PharmaCARE management and medical communities. In the given scenario, PharmaCARE's decision to continue with the production of AD23 despite it's sever impact on health of workers, who manufactured it and patients, who consumed it was directly and indirectly affecting each of the identified stakeholders (LII, n.d.).

Firstly, patients who used this prescribed drug were becoming vulnerable to heart attacks and other chronic diseases. Buyers of this product included medical communities such as Medicare, Medicaid, doctors, hospitals, clinics and physician offices. In appropriate measures to ensure health and safety of workers at the manufacturing facility was causing severe health issues among CompCARE's workers and employees. Firm's ignorance to safe work environment, safe and healthy practices, and legality of the offered product was raising question about government policies and initiatives regarding labor rights and laws (LII, n.d.).

Analysis of PharmaCARE's Ethics

In the given scenario, ethical considerations have been compromised by the firm and its management. The firm took undue advantage of Colberian's willingness to work at the lowest wage rate and to share vital information regarding indigenous cures. The firm violated legal and moral boundaries of a civilized and ethical society and it was also a visible violation of the US laws and regulations regarding employment and labor rights (Care Quality Commission, 2011). Comparative study of the Colberia's indigenous population and PharmaCARE's executives highlights a widened gap between their standard of living and freedom to live a righteous life. On one hand, Colberians were living a less privileged life in primeval shelters in the absence of basic necessities of life. On the contrary, PharmaCARE's executives were living a lavish and luxurious life, which was blessed with every piece of comfort and magnificence (U.S. Department of Labor, n.d.).

In the light of scenario analysis, PharmaCARE's treatment of Colberians was ethically and morally inappropriate. With self-driven values, the firm took every initiative that best defined and achieved organizational objectives regardless of individual rights of Colberian population. Nonetheless, analysis shows that the firm took Colberian people and their dedication for granted and used unethical means to post record business profits. Hence, the firm endangered lives of native species and destroyed local habitants via unethical means and extensive business activities in Colberia (Care Quality Commission, 2011).

Legal Aspects of Allen's Decision

In the present scenario, Allen was provided with the only option i.e. to fire his three workers including Donna, Tom and Ayesha in order to secure his promised bonus and career at PharmaCARE. From a moral and ethical perspective, an employer or manager cannot take undue advantage of his power and authority to create such discrimination at workplace (LII, n.d.). From a legal perspective, Allen's decision to fire the identified personnel is illegal because it is based on discrimination and biased judgment. In accord with the Act of ...