Ethics principles and frameworks

Ethics

The author of this report is asked to discuss ethics as it pertains to a topic of the author's choice. The author of this report chooses to discuss the ethics topic of using factories in Asian and surrounding countries like China and Bangladesh with questionable if not outright deplorable labor laws and/or working conditions. The author of this report will now answer five questions surrounding that topic.

Ethics of Using Foreign Countries in Asia to Make United States Goods

The first question asks the author to discuss culture, values, ethics and other such elements that lead to differences in social culture (Hill, 2013). The United States obviously mimicked a lot of Asian countries in terms of working conditions and lack of labor laws and protections until about 1930. Since then, the social safety net and the associated labor and retirement frameworks have been created to help and protect workers from having nothing in retirement and no protections in the work place. Examples of the United States doing this include the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), Social Security, Medicare and even the Civil Rights Act and its amendments in the 1960's and 1990's could be looped in because of the cultural and social implications that legislation had (Reed & Bogardus, 2012).

The second question asks the author to explain the business and economic implications relating to the differences in culture and values (Hill, 2013). Obviously, the prevailing labor and livability standards are quite different in the United States as compared to countries like Bangladesh and China. Minimum wage laws in Asia, provided they even exist, are often much lower. This squares with the fact that the overall standard of living is also much lower in that part of the world, at least in most areas. Many companies that sell goods in the United States are doing whatever they can to push their profit margins and to keep their cost of goods sold as low as they can, and there is just no competing with companies that manufacture their goods in Mexico, Asia and in other areas of the world where labor costs are much lower due to the prevailing laws and standards in those countries. As such, even if the moral implications are quite obvious, many companies feel they have to "follow the leader" and do the same thing to remain competitive in the United States and global marketplaces. Even market giants like Apple Corporation do this with their goods, although they are going to be making at least some of their goods in the United State in the coming years. As far as what this all means for culture and values, it is clear that basically exploiting the fact that other countries treat their people more poorly is less important than keeping cost of goods sold low and profits high. However, the people that buy the goods are willing accomplices to the process and that is part of the problem.

The third question asks the author to compare and contrast social culture influence values in the workplace (Hill, 2013). As far as the United States, the impact of employees in general is quite high. Although they are diminishing in power, unions have played a huge role in helping to keep employers honest. However, even the unions have stepped out of line at times with the recent implosion of Hostess being a good example. In that case, Hostess said quite plainly that they had to get concessions from the union to remain in business but that the unions would still make the proper minimum wage. One union balked and Hostess was shuttered and sold off. Many to most of the brands were reopened either in the United States or other countries but without there being a union involved. That being said, unions have given power to the people that they have often lacked. Indeed, many employees have been given the "take it or leave it" proposition and businesses have often-times not "spread the wealth" to the employees that make their success possible.

As far as international business goes and the implications that can be faced, the implications are quite obvious (Hill, 2013). Culture can be very different from country to country and being tone-deaf to that can be very dangerous. For example, Richard Nixon flashing the "A-OK" sign in the wrong part of South America was a huge faux pas given that this hand gesture is the equivalent of flipping the bird in that part of the world. However, that quick example lays bare that there are different nuances and variations with how people communicate, what things mean and so forth. One major implication to operating an international business, especially in the context of an American or Western business, is that many other countries do not like outsiders. This can be true for a number of reasons. Many Muslim countries generally distrust (if not hate) the United States and the West due to the amount of wars and other conflicts that have been had. Many other countries dislike the West because they see the West as invading and pilfering their country. After the mass-colonization done by Britain, France and Spain through the 1950's, that is not hard to understand for anyone with an understanding of history.

As for the fifth and final question, it asks what managers can do to incorporate ethical considerations into decision making. In short, managers can truly think about all the implications of making one decision over another. Just looking at the "dollars and cents" is short-sighted. Instead, it should also be assess what social and cultural impacts each decision could have. This would be wise even for a company that entirely operates in a single country like the United States because cultural and ethical considerations can vary quite a bit based on geographical area or even a single part of a metropolitan area. Concerns that could lead a union being formed or workers staging protests for injustices are also a concern. As far as true international workers go, making sure that one understands their culture and their values is a big part of keeping them happy. Incidents like the factory collapse in Bangladesh should never happen. That building was an accident waiting to happen and never should have been used to manufacture American or Western goods in general. A simple communication to the government to verify its legal status or an inspection of the site should have headed that off before it got to that point.