Question

You are the CEO of an industrial chemical plant named Johnson Chemicals. You manufacture the inert chemicals for more than 100 different manufacturers. They range from the military to paint companies. Fifty percent of your gross revenue comes from one company that manufactures fuel for military and commercial aircraft: this is 30 percent of your bottom line. Your second-largest customer manufactures fuel additives and it represents five percent of your bottom line. That company is also a wholly-owned subsidiary of your number one customer.

You have found out that your number one customer has been dumping millions of gallons of waste products into a local small river that feeds into the Mississippi River. If you “blow the whistle” you could be responsible for losing 30 to 50 percent of your bottom line revenue. This would result in the unemployment of nearly half of your 5,000 employee workforce. Also, there could be a backlash among your 98 remaining customers. Your reputation could be ruined if you are deemed to be a “whistleblower” or “rat.” Still, you know that people unaware of the dumping will use the water for fishing, drinking, etc. You also know that people will die from too much exposure to the kinds of chemicals being dumped.

1. What on earth are you to do? Please write two paragraphs. The first paragraph should show how you would justify exposing the dumping. The second paragraph should address justifications for you not exposing your number one client. The two paragraphs should each be at least six sentences long and not more than twelve sentences long. Use at least two of the theories on moral problems you learned about earlier in this chapter to justify your position as proponent or opponent of blowing the whistle or remaining silent.

Answer 1

Solution -

The dumpings is not justified as it is harmful to the society in a big way. It is for the larger good of the society that this incident should be reported. There is the responsibility of business towards the environment and such an incident is unacceptable. The act of dumping waste in a river and polluting the waters causing a health hazard for the society and hence as per theories of utilitarianism and Kant the action involves a harm towards the larger group of society and the act in principle is wrong this the action should be reported. The business must recognise the larger group and should deal with this issue in a responsible manner. Turning a blind eye on such an incident will lead to a destruction of humanity and encourage unethical attitude in the company.

The business is liable to remain loyal towards its customers. The loyalty theory is all about protecting the rights of a customer. Reporting such an incident would not only lead to loss in our business but also induce loss in the form of penalties and brand erosion for the customer. Loyalty is a virtue and breaking the trust of the customer would be unfair. It is a business activity and hence bringing in moral policing can only confuse the decision making process in the company. Hence whistle-blowing over this incident is unfaur to the customer. It is the duty of the customer to make their own business decisions. As a business organisation we should remain loyal towards our customer and do not interfere in their business periphery and conduct.