Evaluate a Business Ethics News Item

Looking for ethical issues and how we think the company would respond give the assigned decision rule and how utilitarianism works for the first artical.

Evaluate a Business Ethics News Item
You are responsible for writing and submitting a paper that analyzes a specified
business ethics news item from the perspective of the ethical decision rule identified by
your instructor.
The instructor will distribute the two best business ethics news items submitted by you
or your classmates in response to the news-item submission assignment. You may
choose one or the other for your paper topic. Only that article should be used in
fulfillment of the assignment—the use of any outside sources without citation (which will
not be accepted) constitutes plagiarism.
The instructor will also specify which of the six decision rules you must apply to the
article. If you have kept up with the course content, absorbing the readings, videos, and
class discussions, you will be able to write the paper effectively and efficiently. If you
have not, you will need to become well versed in the selected theory before writing
(without the benefit of class discussions), which will reduce the amount of time that you
have available to craft an excellent paper. Identify the article’s major and its minor
ethical issues, and analyze them from the perspective of that decision rule—as if you
are “trying it on” as the decision rule that you might live by.
The paper must be between 275 and 300 words (absolutely no more); place your name
and word count in the upper right-hand corner of the paper. You should think in terms of
writing a 350-400 word paper, and then paring it down and crafting it into a very tight,
brief paper that fits into the required word range. Do not write a “short” paper and then
engage in puffery. The paper must be double spaced in Times New Roman 12-point
font, and uploaded as a Microsoft Word attachment by the date and time listed in the
course schedule. This time is a cutoff—you are welcome to submit the paper early.
Papers that miss the cutoff will lose 25% of their points if submitted any time in the
following 24 hours, and will not be accepted after that time.
Your grade will be determined based on how closely your paper matches the above
requirements, along with the depth of your analysis and the accuracy of your application
of the decision rule. Invest sufficient time into thinking through, drafting, and refining
your paper: It accounts for 20% of your course grade.
Please read these instructions SUPER CLOSELY! Afterwards, go to the Part B News
Article assignment page and read the assignment instructions as well.
Your Part B News Article assignment states that I will provide you two articles from
which you are to choose ONE to write your paper on. Here are the two articles below
and you are to choose ONE:
Please choose ONE of the following two articles, with the corresponding ethical theory
designated, to write your Part B Evaluate Business news ethics item paper due July
25th, 2024. DO NOT USE ANY OF THE ARTICLES YOU SUBMITTED IN PART A!
FOR EXAMPLE, the first article you have the option to choose, I have assigned the
Utilitarianism theory. Therefore, you would refresh your memory on what that theory is
from your readings and videos, then use that theory ONLY and talk about what may
have happened if the company in the article had used THAT theory in resolving their
decision/situation that you just read about in the article. For example, if Boeing had
applied Utilitarianism in making their decision and in their actions, would the end result
still be the same? Why or why not?
Also, make sure to read the instructions for this assignment that are included
within the assignment itself in your Module 2.
#1 Article option:
Title: Stop Shein listing on the FTSE, workers’ rights campaigners urge
Website: https://www.theguardian.com/business/article/2024/jun/09/stop-sheinlisting-on-the-ftse-workers-rights-campaigners-urge
Analyze the Shein article using Utilitarianism Theory
Workers’ rights campaigners have called for the UK’s next government to oppose
the online fashion business Shein
Links to an external site.
joining the FTSE, arguing that a London listing would be “yet another betrayal to
working people everywhere and the planet”.
Alena Ivanova, campaigns lead at Labour
Links to an external site.
Behind the Label, said it had heard the news of senior British politicians courting
Shein’s £50bn listing “with dismay” given what she claimed was a lack of
transparency about its supply chain and ethical concerns.
She highlighted: an investigation last month by Switzerland-based non-profit
group Public Eye, which found that workers producing garments for Shein
routinely work more than 70-hour weeks; exposés alleging forced labour in the
Uyghur region of China; and the company’s “cavalier approach to design
appropriation”, which has led to a string oflawsuits
Links to an external site.
relating to allegedly copied garments
Links to an external site.
.
Mathias Bolton, head of commerce at UNI Global Union, which represents service
industries around the world, said: “Shein shouldn’t be rewarded with the
credibility of being listed in the City, or anywhere else, given the lack of
transparency in their supply chain and shocking reports of severe labour
violations.”
The company, which operates largely from China, where it was founded, but is
headquartered in Singapore, is rumoured to be planning to release documents
outlining plans to list on the London Stock Exchange
Links to an external site.
imminently.
However, reports this weekend suggested it may not attempt to join the London
market until September, after the election, when a Labour administration is
expected to be in power.
The campaigners voiced their concerns after the British Fashion Council (BFC),
whose members include Burberry, Mulberry and Victoria Beckham’s fashion
label, warned that Shein’s planned flotation on the London Stock Exchange was a
“significant concern” to the industry.
Caroline Rush, the chief executive of the BFC said that if the government
welcomed Shein into the British fashion community, it must commit to “greater
clothing market regulation and due diligence to ensure a level playing field for all
businesses in the sector”.
“Whilst we appreciate that Shein has committed to meeting acceptable industry
standards, questions remain about the ethicality and sustainability of a business
model and supply chain that consistently undercuts British designers and
retailers,” she said in comments first reported by the Mail on Sunday.
A Shein spokesperson said it “has a zero-tolerance policy for forced labour, and
we are committed to respecting human rights. We take visibility across our
supply chain seriously and have invested millions of pounds in strengthening
governance and compliance.”
The company said its supplier audits showed “a consistent improvement in
performance and compliance”, including “improvements in ensuring that workers
are compensated fairly for what they do”.
It said research carried out by third-party auditors at Shein supplier facilities in
China
Links to an external site.
has found that basic salaries were on average twice the local minimum wage.
Shein said it took copyright infringement seriously, adding: “It is not our intent to
infringe anyone’s valid intellectual property and it is not our business model to
do so.”
The company said it had published a Modern Slavery statement on its website, as
required by UK law, and added: “As a global company serving customers across
more than 150 countries, we believe it is healthy to attract scrutiny and
transparency and we want to be held to the highest standards.”
The potential London listing of Shein is seen by some as a sign of hope for the
City after a number of other major companies have chosen to list elsewhere.
The chancellor, Jeremy Hunt, met the company earlier this year, while the Labour
party has indicated its support for Shein’s potential London listing, which could
be the UK’s biggest ever stock market flotation.
However, some senior politicians, including three parliamentary committee
chairs, have questioned the efforts to woo Shein, raising concerns about labour
conditions
Links to an external site.
in its supply chains.
Labour said it had talked to Shein as the party sees “raising investment,
productivity and growth” as a key mission for government and added that it
expected “the highest regulatory standards and business practices from any
company operating in the UK”.
#2 Article Option:
Title: Swiss giant Nestle has rolled back recycling targets and the difference
amounts to the weight of 30 Eiffel Towers
Website: https://fortune.com/europe/2024/07/11/swiss-giant-nestle-has-rolledback-recycling-targets-the-difference-would-equal-weight-of-30-eiffel-towersmondelez-unilever-ferrero/
Links to an external site.
*** Analyze the Nestle article using Rawls’ Justice Theory
When Nestle SA tweaked its plastic packaging goals in 2022, few noticed. The shift in
language on the website of the world’s largest food maker pledged to mostly use plastic
“designed for” recycling by 2025 rather than only use “recyclable” or reusable packaging
by next year — its original commitment.
The subtle rewording, highlighted publicly here for the first time, might seem like
semantics. But the difference amounts to 280,000 metric tons of additional nonrecyclable plastic waste a year, according to the latest available data for 2022. Piled up,
it would weigh the same as 30 Eiffel towers or 1,400 Statues of Liberty.
It’s also a fresh indication that the efforts to curb the use of virgin plastics — including a
key pledge made by dozens of companies since 2018 to make all such packaging
recyclable, reusable or compostable — are failing. The rolling back of some
commitments coincides with companies facing pressure from two years of rising raw
material costs and investor calls to focus on profitability over saving the planet.
“If some of the world’s largest multinational companies with near limitless resources at
their disposal are failing to deliver on their commitments and pledges, something is
clearly very wrong with the system,” said Christina Dixon, ocean campaign leader at the
Environmental Investigation Agency, a non-governmental organization, referring to the
voluntary commitments by companies to reduce the use of plastics.
Nestle, the maker of Nespresso pods and Maggi Stock cubes, said it changed the
wording because it was important to report on what it could control. “As communicated
publicly in 2022, we remain committed to achieving 100% reusable or recyclable
packaging in the long term but given infrastructure barriers this was no longer
realistically achievable by 2025,” a Nestle spokesperson said.
But according to its own data the company had fallen back. In 2022, the last year
available, 51% of its packaging was recyclable, reusable or compostable, down from
55% in 2018, the base year restated for a fair comparison. The company expects this to
rise to 63% for 2023 as some materials get recycled more widely. Using the adjusted
goal and with the tweaked language, however, things look much better: in 2023, 83.5%
of its plastic packaging was designed for recycling.
About 400 million tons of plastic waste
Links to an external site.
are produced globally every year — so another 30 Eiffel Towers might seem like a drop
in the ocean. But the United Nations has warned that if historic growth trends continue,
that figure will almost treble to 1.1 billion tons in 2050
Links to an external site.
.
Much of that will end up in seas and rivers, causing massive harm to animal and
human health. But with less than 10% of plastic recycled globally, according to the
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development
Links to an external site.
and companies like Nestle failing to reach their goals, promises that once looked bold
now look unachievable.
Some producers blame insufficient recycling infrastructure, inadequate regulation and
lethargic consumers for delays in recycling. And call on governments to do more to
boost investment and create financial incentives to develop demand for more types of
plastics markets.
But that is only part of the story. Critics says companies need to buck their addiction to
packaging that doesn’t have viable recycling solutions — things like multilayered plastic
sachets used for food or household consumer products.
“A very big share of packaging put on the market today is not designed recyclable,” said
Sander Defruyt, who works on initiatives to create a circular economy for plastic at the
Ellen MacArthur Foundation. “Industry will need to continue making big investments in
innovation and production line changes to move away from these, towards reusable or
recyclable solutions.”
The Foundation, a non-profit organization founded by the yachtswoman, has
standardized the reporting of environmental pledges for big companies.
Technically difficult, collecting recyclable plastic is also expensive and bound by
complex regulations.
Nestle isn’t the only company fudging its way through an ever growing sea of plastic
pollution. Unilever Plc publicly rolled back
Links to an external site.
its ambitious plastics reduction targets in April, while Mondelez International Inc. and
Ferrero Group quietly tweaked their targets in published reports to set a “designed for”
goal. Unilever said it had made tangible progress in reducing plastic waste but has
much more work to do. A Ferrero spokesperson said recyclability at scale depends on
the infrastructure and processes available at local level. Mondelez said the change was
driven by factors such as the integration of acquisitions and the time needed to
complete trials across its supply chains.
Other plastics reduction pledges are also proving a challenge. Even though Nestle says
it’s on track to meet a goal of reducing its use of virgin plastics by a third compared with
2018, that figure was only 15% last year, meaning progress must dramatically
accelerate to meet ambitions.
“Given the rampant food price inflation, this was not an easy path to pursue,” Mark
Schneider, Nestle’s chief executive officer, told journalists in April of its efforts to reach
environmental targets over the last two years.
Yet companies like Nestle and Unilever are considered sector leaders in terms of their
plastics reduction efforts. They report annual progress on their commitments to the
Ellen MacArthur Foundation. So if they are failing to reach their goals, that bodes poorly
for the rest.
They want the UN Plastics Treaty — a legally binding global agreement expected this
year — to reduce plastics production and set the same standard for companies globally.
But reaching consensus is tricky and the last and penultimate round of talks took
production caps off the table
Links to an external site.
.
“The global plastic industry has created the illusion of recyclability,” Planet Tracker, an
environmental NGO said in a statement. “When in reality a shocking 91% of plastic is
not recycled globally.”