Hello. This is a discussion post ( 175 wrd) and two discussion posts from students that need responses with (100 words). No plagiarism, Thank you!
Discussion: Respond to the topic of discussion below in a minimum of 175 words:
- Choose an ethical issue recently covered in the news faced by a business in the United States.
- State the ethical issue.
- Discuss the resolution of the ethical issue.
- Explain how the law and constitution were applied in the resolution.
- Research your assignment using the APA style (7th ed.) format.
1. Student: Starbucks was recently sued for ‘unfair and deceptive’ trade practices. The lawsuit alleges that Starbucks was aware of instances when child labor laws weren’t being enforced at some of the farms that supply their coffee beans. The ethical issue is that they state their items are ethically sourced and there is a proof otherwise. It also alleges that they were aware of really terrible conditions that were the employee housing and as well as some deceptive practices when it comes to employment like charging them for necessary transportation, food and paying for terrible living conditions. They were said to be employing underage workers and not providing clean drinking water. Starbucks denies the allegations and enforces that they are the buyer not the supplier and can’t be held liable for the suppliers’ actions.
It has been stated that Brazilian inspectors and authorities have notified Starbucks several times of inappropriate workplace practices prior to this lawsuit. They have also recently had issues with suppliers in Guatemala and Kenya. Starbucks has made an agreement to stay committed to the Global Human Rights Statement where they agreed to use ethically sourced goods. Starbucks is currently being sued, due to the legal action taken.
References:
(https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/starbucks-sued-allegedly-using-coffee-farms-rights-abuses-touting-ethi-rcna130393)
2. Student: The ethical issue that I choose is vaccine mandates. The order for vaccine mandates follows the social contract theory, which refers to if it’s for the greater good its ok to lose a few freedoms, in this case the social issue is the right of choice in getting vaccinated or not. The article is on the supreme court’s decision to block the Biden administration’s mandate, as well as OSHA’s emergency rule to have businesses with more than 100 works to mandate the vaccine. In which OSHA was trying to do the right thing in order to save lives by “using its authority under a statute called the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 to regulate workplace safety” (Mello et al., 2022). The Supreme court read this as a narrow authority under this statute, and that “Congress only intended to give OSHA the power to address hazards that are confined to the workplace setting” (Mello et al., 2022).
The final judgment of this matter comes mainly from “much of the attention was focused upon what is unique to the workplace—and that OSHA only had jurisdiction in that area” (Mello et al., 2022), and “They distinguished COVID as being in the category of “day-to-day dangers that all face,” likening it to risks like crime and air pollution” (Mello et al., 2022) putting it out of OSHA’s jurisdiction. This resolution confined OSHA’s jurisdiction and allowed individual companies to decide whether or not they should mandate or test, as well individuals to decide if they wanted the vaccine.
References:
Mello, M. M., GouldIV, W. B., Duff, B., & Driscroll, S. (2022, January 20). A Look at the Supreme Court Ruling on Vaccination Mandates. SLS Blogs.
