The ethical decision to not spend time or money to put safety measures in the play lost lives for many. Corporate Social Responsibility should maintain high ethical and legal standards in every corporation should have a set of fundamental core values based on sound ethical principles help define the true measure of a company. Legal wise Amtrak needs to provide safe service for their customers, and they need to show them they are doing everything possible to achieve this. They need to provide safe and dependable service. As well as build their name and brand back up from this disaster.
We believe that both the employee and the employer were unethical in this case because it illustrates a degree of moral intensity. The employee had a due diligence to the employer and should have brought his concerns to higher management instead of blogging it on a low profile under a false name. The employer had a due diligence to the employee and should have expressed their concern to the employee. The employer could of asked the employee if he could have deleted the blog or edit it so that the name of the employer was not mentioned. The degree of harm that could have happened to the company was not justified because when a search was made in an Internet search and the blog was not easily accessible in the public domain and this does not give the employer the just cause for termination of the employee.
It should focus on results and find the underlying cause of the problem to resolve this from excelling over time. Carefully make sure that they are not getting in over their heads and take smaller steps before jumping into to something that can ruin them. By the company, admitting nationally any fault of their own this will help to gain the public trust once again. By informing investors and consumers of this wrongdoing, this is the first step to fixing the problem at hand. Making sure that all involved in this wrongdoing are reprimanded for their actions and noting that to investors and the public.
How can you get to the bottom of an issue if employees are upset of being accused of doing their job wrong? Manzoni should have been the one to conduct this meeting to stress the importance of doing the input correctly she is the chief executive officer (CEO). Employees basically rejected everything they were told because of Singh’s approach to the training and the way she talked to them, it is evident since the data entry worsened. Training should lead to improvement not a decline in the services. These are all potential sources of the problem.
Everyone related to this company is affected by this situation. Investigators and employees didn’t want to get involves because they didn’t want to investigate their own bosses or be involve in conflicts of interest. I think their claims were reasonable but don’t think action should be taken upon them. But to prevent this issue there should be a policy or clause addressing this issue with its consequences so it doesn’t happen again. 3.
Case 4F: Lack of Fairness (pillar #4) Volunteer boards must have the moral courage to stand on the core ethical values of justice and fairness. When justice and fairness are compromised, the organization loses its credibility, financial support declines, and board members resign. I experienced all of this during my final term on one volunteer board. The primary cause of the injustice was the concealment of a memo written by members of a regional consortium and addressed to our Executive Administrator with explicit instructions, “Please read to your board.” She did not. She didn’t want the board to see the resentment and disruption that the name change was causing with members of this regional consortium.
INTRODUCTION It is an obligation of an employer to aggressively protect their employees from any form of Harassment and discrimination in the workplace. To instill a zero tolerance towards these issues, it is crucial for employers to educate themselves and their employees on issues, regulations and policies associated with them. In the following dissertation, I plan to describe how laws, regulations and policies against sexual harassment, harassment and discrimination in the workplace play a vital role on the business brand and relations with all employees regardless of nationality. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) for sexual harassment defines sexual harassment as unwelcomed sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal/Non- verbal, or physical conduct of a sexual nature. Harassment includes but not limited to any offensive conduct that has the purpose of effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual’s work performance or creating an intimidating, offensive, or hostile environment.
1.2 The employers have a responsibility to make sure correct PPE is made available, organise the necessary training for staff and undertake risk assessments regarding infection control. The employers must inform staff of infection control policies and procedures and make sure they are provided with the necessary information to follow safe practices when working such as a COSHH file, risk assessments and information posters. 2.1 Most of the legal regulations relating to infection control come under the Health and Safety at work act. This act is about ensuring a safe work place for employers, employees and members of the public by minimising accidents and infection spreading at work.
The main aim is to make sure that no one gets hurt or becomes ill, equipment and environment will not get damaged. Accidents and ill health can ruin lives, and can also affect business if output is lost, machinery is damaged, insurance costs increase, or if you have to go to court. Therefore, carrying out risk assessments, preparing and implementing a safety statement and keeping both up to date will not in themselves prevent accidents and ill health but they will play a crucial part in reducing their likelihood. Employers, managers and supervisors should all ensure that workplace practices reflect the risk assessments and safety statement. Behaviour, the way in which everyone works, must reflect the safe working practices laid down in these documents.
I think that both CEO's should've let their employees know the status of what was going on, because it seemed that they had no idea of the things that were occurring. Also spending the company's money on a ridiculous renovation of the CEO's office is completely unethical. If it were me, I think the best thing to do to modify these decisions is to just focus on the responsibilities of both parties involved. The well being of both companies should have been considered above all by the companies