Ethics and the legal environment

Ethics and the Legal Environment

George Mackee has a problem. His wife is after him, his boss is after him, and one day soon, the whole community of Hondo, Texas may be after him. George has one very large, very simple problem: He works for Ardnak Plastics, Inc. Ardnack Plastics is a small manufacturing company making small parts for small machinery, yet its corporate problems are far larger. In the wake of tight margins and financial restraint, the Environmental Protection Agency is wagering fines to reprimand the satellite Hondo plant for its emissions violations. Facing eminent corporate relocation and certain unemployment or compromised ethics, George Mackee must find a solution.

Among the nuanced complexity of problems webbing around George Mackee, ethics is the liming factor. He has three core concerns in this vein: whether or not to conduct plant work at night in order to mislead the EPA about the actual emissions levels, the value of maximizing on the less stringent environmental concerns of Hondo's southern neighbor, and whether or not to destroy his own community. Should he rotate the plant's schedule to use its smokestacks more at night, the daytime-active EPA would measure the Hondo plant's levels as low as those of its peers, also fudging their emissions exams. Should he do so, not only is he misleading the EPA, but the very standards set forth by the government to maintain a safe, clean, operable community would be undercut, ultimately hurting the Hondo people. Should he decide to incur another month of fines, the plant will be relocated to Mexico. If the plant were to go to Mexico, would not the same contaminations feared by the EPA 15 miles north affect the residents of the new plant town? Perhaps, too, George Mackee must wonder if those contaminants might still travel north to Hondo. Ultimately, were he to let the plant move to Mexico, he would leave his whole community in a state of unemployed destitution so pervasive even his own job would not be safe. However, should he continue on, the levels of contamination carefully monitored by the EPA might wreak on Hondo a civil action reminiscent of W.R. Grace & Co., not only infecting the town with pollutants but destroying the health of its people.

While George Mackee has a problem, the primary stakeholders in his issue are not free of the same turmoil he must quietly face. George's family, the townspeople of both Hondo and the Mexican town, the Environmental Protection Agency, those affected by the pollution, and Ardnak Plastics are all key players. Yet, of all of those with stake in the issue, only three have the ability to make decisions: the EPA, which executes its decisions through financial levy, Ardnak Plastics, as voiced by George's boss, Bill, and George, who has been handed the decision to either keep Ardnak Plastics in Hondo in a case of questionable ethics or, to the great demise of his community and place in it, let the plant move to Mexico.

Each of these ethical concerns is vital. While George may solve his problem by looking for another job or discussing his situation with someone in upper management, the crux of the problem still exists in a format understandable through a variety of lenses. Kant's categorical imperative and Mill's theory of utilitarianism combine with a rights-based perspective, justice-based perspective, and Kohlbergian moral development to provide an in-depth analysis of the ethical concerns at hand.

Kantian philosophy provides for the concept of a categorical imperative, central to moral philosophy. This imperative is derived from a single Categorical Imperative, denoting an absolute, unconditional requirement for morality, allowing no exception and justified by itself. The Kantian imperative is a black-and-white, apodeictic approach to ethics that, in the corporate field, makes for fiscally difficult procedures. According to Kant, both individuals and companies must "act only on the maxim that you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law."

All actions can be applied to this universal moral rule if they can be suggested to being made consistently universal, derive and respect the autonomy of human beings, and respects the rational beings as ends in themselves.

Examining the blunder facing George Mackee and, ultimately, Ardnak Plastics, the situation is cut-and-dry. In the Kantian analysis, George is not able to mislead the EPA, as in doing so he would not be able to justify either the end -- polluting the community to save his job -- or the means -- deceiving an arm of the very system established to protect his safety under the common laws of a republic. Unable to bend the readings to suit his own needs, George would assuredly see the plant transfer to Mexico; yet, in good conscious, even that is a prospect unwelcome to Kant. Should the plant transfer to Mexico, it would be George's responsibility to avail the EPA of the transfer of emissions and any ongoing pollutants that might travel a fast fifteen miles north to Hondo.

Yet, destroying the foundations of the community by essentially shipping the plant to another country, George would not be in question from Kant's categorical perspective. The sustainability of the plant in Hondo would be summarily based on deceit, and, as such, is completely unethical in this light. The degradation of the town and ensuing poverty, decline, and misfortune are the accompaniment of a commercial life tied inextricably to false levels and pollutants, cutting to the heart of the concern in Kantian view: Ardnak Plastic must find the money to purchase new scrubbers for the smokestacks in the Hondo, Texas plant. Should they not, for profit, design, or ability, they are committing the first flaw of indecency to the universal law of Categorical Imperative, and George Mackee must continue to honestly report the emissions levels to the Environmental Protection Agency.

Mill's theory of Utilitarianism provides a different lens through which one can examine the options before George Mackee and Ardnak Plastics. Mill's theories, based on that of his family friend and peer John Bentham and honed with provocative practice, provide for a theory of ethics surrounded by an idea of happiness. As it was conjectured throughout the ages with a variety of definitions and little agreement, Mill viewed morality not as a science, but instead as an art. This prescription served as the foundation of all his thoughts in ethics and insistence that morality involves "the application of a law to an individual case."

To examine each individual case, Mill mandates the necessity of proof; utilitarianism establishes what kind of proof can be allowed as tacit to each case. Mill promotes an idea for ethics in which there is a "creed which accepts the foundations of morals, Utility, or the Greatest Happiness Principle," maintaining that "actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness."

If Ardnak Plastics were to examine its levels of happiness, corporate profitability would be the zenith of its concerns. Little attention would be paid to the concerns of the EPA or the moral crisis otherwise impending its Hondo manager, but instead the height of its focus would be the profitability of the company. For George Mackee, the problem would be equally solved.

Looking at George Mackee's situation from the perspective of Mill's theory of Utilitarianism, the conflict would be easily resolved: he would, simply, put the EPA off his track by doing like all the other managers in his field and committing his worst offenses at night, keeping his daytime emissions at levels approved by the Agency, restoring the security of his job, and reaping the benefits of being the manager of the community plant employing a large swath of the people of Hondo. The reasons for this simple decision, however, are murkied by Mill's approach. George faces a wide variety of ethical tensions, particularly those posed by losing his job and the financial situation he might incur as well as the environmental state of decay inevitably following a cycle of illegal pollutant emissions, but it is his role in the community that would be the defining factor in this decision. Mary Mackee made it clear: their role in the community, and, accordingly, that of his two children, is inextricably tied to the presence of the Ardnak plant in Hondo and their role at its helm. While the other concerns he faces would cause discomfort, ignoring this source of "happiness" would not be utilitarian; to protect his happiness and that of those most important to him, he must first protect his job.

The cost and benefits analysis promoted by the utilitarian perspective also bring into question a variety of other piques. The cost-benefit paradigm promotes a view in which the best alternative is not only that which promotes the most happiness for George, but also one that promotes happiness for the most people. In that case, George must do whatever is in his power to maintain the livelihood of the plant in Hondo. On the flipside, should more people be ultimately injured by the contaminants set free by nighttime emissions at the Hondo plant, George should report the company to the EPA and let it move to Mexico, ensuring that there would be minimal upwind chemical repercussions to the people of his community.

Rights-based ethical decision-making would proffer the same conclusion: George Mackee should not deceive the Environmental Protection Agency. The Rights Perspective offers a paradigm for ethics that identifies certain fundamental civil, political, and economic rights that merit protection for the sake of dignity in each individual. Among these rights are a freedom of conscience and physical integrity; George Mackee should not, for the larger sake of the community's employment patterns hide the actual emissions at the Hondo plant in hopes of keeping the plant alive. Instead, he should continue to be honest about his plant's proceedings, emitting pollutants that are fined by the EPA and paid for by corporate until they buy more scrubbers to protect the physical integrity of those represented by the EPA.

From this perspective, government exists to protect the inalienable rights of those it represents. In this case, the regulatory infraction committed by the Hondo plant of Ardnak plastics is financially levied for the purpose of discouraging the emissions and cleaning up the communal waste now affecting the people of Hondo. The only option available to George is to honor the people of Hondo by respecting their dignity and right to clean space, something initially ignored by the Ardnak corporate office in Austin. Additionally, the Ardnak headquarters must find the money to provide the scrubbers for the smokestakes to maintain the community of Hondo's right to a clean environment and economic sustainability, something ensured by their plant. Should they force upon the people of Hondo pollution and loss of financial solubility while also infringing upon the freedom of conscience entitled to George Mackee, they extent to which they are remiss demands immediate remedy.

A justice-based management system would demand the same of Mackee and the Ardnak Plastic Incorporation, but for different reasons. A justice-based system of management is one in which a sentiment of ownership shared between all workers fosters a corporate profitability that also provides value to the customer, meanwhile empowering each member of the team. Primarily, a justice-based approach embodies two principles of equity, the first entitling all people to a proportionate share of what they produce, and the second entangling them to a culture offering equal dignity and opportunity. In this simple analysis of benefits and burdens, each alternative requires examination of affect on the stakeholders.

Should Ardnak move to Mexico, the people of Hondo are summarily denied the culture of dignity and opportunity promoted by a justice-based system. Should George Mackee's supervisor Bill continue to demand of him a choice of either polluting his community or denying them employment, he too is being denied the second type of equity. Ultimately, the solution to the problem in Hondo is easily solved by the justice-based approach to ethics: upper management needs to reorganize.

The solution to this situation is derived at its problem: neither Bill nor the others in Austin feel any sense of ownership toward the Hondo plant. They are disconnected from its livelihood, its problems, and its people. As such, they are unable to manage the inevitable complications riddling its quotidian existence; should they feel the ownership inherently mandated by the justice-based approach, they would be unable to deny the people of Hondo, both in the community and in the plant, the second type of equity they so deserve. Without change from headquarters, George Mackee is forced to account for the ownership he does feel, and carefully weigh his options between material and environmental support for the people of his plant, town, and family.

Long after Kant and Mill, Lawrence Kohlberg developed a systematic staging of moral development for the sake of ethical analysis. He believed firmly in a stage of progression through which people grow in their moral reasoning, thus providing their basis for ethical behavior. He identified six distinct stages that can be generally categorized into three groups: Pre-Conventional, Conventional, and Post-Conventional Levels. Each level was associated with a social orientation. At the pre-conventional level, obedience and punishment designated the first stage, and individualism, instrumentalism, and exchange characterized the second. At the conventional level, the "Good Boy/Girl" social orientation qualified as stage three, and the idea of law and order typified that of stage four. The last two levels are categorized as post-conventional, where the fifth stage is oriented by a social contract and the sixth stage by principled conscience.

At the first stage of moral thought, one does what one is told. As such, George Mackee would have immediately modified his plant's practices from daytime activity to night in order to save his job. At the second stage, he could view this action as morally "right," because it is in his own best interest to not only keep his job, but maintain his position at the head of the community in Hondo through is professional stature. At the third level of thinking, now deemed conventional, his decision would remain the same, but for different reasons: this time, in order to please both is boss and his wife, he would alter his business practices. At stage four, he is oriented by law and obligations of duty, and his options begin to change. Now, he is not only responsible to his wife and boss, but also to the people of Hondo, whom he either has to decide to pollute or employ. While this see-saw could teeter either way, the fifth stage spurs him forward to be honest with the EPA and let the plant go to Mexico should Ardnak ultimately move it, as he is filled with an understanding of social mutuality and an interest in the welfare of others. At the last level of post-conventional thought, his sights expand to the realm of individual conscience and a respect for universal principle, ensuring not only his honesty with the EPA, but also some sort of direct action either with the government or upper management, ensuring the welfare of the people of the Mexican town with equal conviction as those of his own.

While in each situation, George Mackee is the one faced with creation a solution to the impending problem, it is the lagging social responsibility of the corporation that has spawned the debate. Without doubt, Ardnak Plastics has ignored all aspects of its corporate responsibility: legally, economically, ethically, and philanthropically. Legally, they are tied to the regulations imposed by the EPA on all members of the American community as posited by the team of scientists who liberally determine the safety levels of contaminants. Economically, they too are remiss; ignoring the greater cost of polluting the environment, by avoiding the immediate input for new scrubbers, they are creating the inevitably large economic expense of hazardous waste clean-up that will, one day, be borne by the community at large, funded by tax-payers, and without legal action, ignored by Ardnak.

Ethically, they have failed to protect their workers from pollution and, in addition to strapping them with that personal concern, have also suffered them the questioning of conscience symbolized by George Mackee's plight: follow laws geared for public safety and protection, or protect the safety of a whole community's livelihood? Philanthropically, Ardnak has failed without compromise. When the regulatory services of the United States reminded them that their emissions levels were so hazardous to the health of the community that they warranted fines levied, Ardnak's solution is to move the business to a place where the government does not legislate its citizens' environmental protection.

Because a capitalist marketplace promotes high profit at all cost, it is the role of government to regulate to the point of providing a guiding tool for ethical decision-making. While the law provides no guarantee for keeping Ardnak in the United States ant not outsourcing its jobs to Mexico, it does provide financial incentives to keep a company domestic, in the form of import-export tariffs. While these fluctuate in political atmospheres and changing administrations, the Mexican example serves as a good choice, since the political climate of Washington, D.C., is one in which there is a steady fear of jobs lost to the cheaper labor and weaker governance below the Texas line. To prevent the company from infringing upon the sanctity of its natural environment, the EPA imposes stringent regulations monitoring its emissions, precluding nothing short of fines and lawsuits for those not in compliance.

Yet, there is nothing currently in place to prevent Bill in Austin from putting George Mackee in the Catch-22 in which he is morbidly ensconced. While the position of George Mackee is clear, to fully address the ethical concerns of the situation, it is necessary to look at the part each stakeholder plays in the puzzle. From the employee to the environment, the community to the shareholder, and the customer to the media, each face a bevy of questions that determine their management within the ethical system.

More than almost any other group, the employees face an onslaught ethical concerns in regards to the situation in Hondo. While they are an important part of the Hondo community, they are an unimportant part of the society at Ardnak. To the leaders in Austin, they are expendable. Not only are they members of the community whose children and spouses can be contaminated at corporate will, they are also easily replaced by workers willing to do the same amount for less and under less strict regulation. The employees are not only responsible for a sense of business loyalty, but they have community obligations to which they are beholden, despite being ignored by Austin. To manage the stakeholders as seen in the employees, it is up to the company to provide the sense of ownership described by the justice-based ethics management and to respects its employees as both individuals at the workplace and members of a working community.