"Ethics in the News' - Subgroup 4 (Wednesdays)

Subgroup 4, please post your ethics news blogs in this thread. Thanks!

In the Wall Street Journal today, there was an article about the wife of the CEO of Coke using the company corporate jet to attend WNBA games of the team that they owe. This calls into question the MORAL JUDGEMENT of the CEO and his wife. The CEO also appears to be STIFLING CRITICISM about the use of the company jet. While it might be in his rights to use the plane, does it MODEL THE WAY? Is it possible that the CEO is MISLEADING FOLLOWERS saying that he is present on all of these flights? Now instead of INFLUENCING and INSPIRING, he is left being DEFENSIVE with the media and trying to repair the view.

I read an article on Yahoo News about a judge that was just re-admitted to his bench after a video went viral of him viciously beating his daughter. Many people are upset and feel disconfirmed that he is allowed back on the stand. While he was suspended during the investigation he still received his full salary. This judge is a toxic leader because he has positional and expert power, but at home is partaking in the same actions that causes him to sentenence people daily. I can't imagine that people on trial and juries will find any as a legitimate leader anymore.

http://news.yahoo.com/texas-judge-beating-video-returns-bench-141934303.html

You may want to snap up those Twinkies while you still can, gang. I'm reading a story now about a pledge by Hostess Brands to liquidate itself tomorrow, killing 18,000 jobs, if its bakers don't end their strike to protest the new contract imposed on them by a bankruptcy court.

Apparently this is not the first time the company has struggled to practice servant leadership. The liquidation claim follows an announcement on Monday by the company to close bakeries in Seattle, St. Louis, and Cincinnati in response to the strike, cutting more than 600 jobs.

Frank Hurt, the president of the bakers' union, lauds the actions of his membership for what essentially represents their courage to leave. "Our members are on strike because they have had enough," he says. "They are not willing to take draconian wage and benefit cuts on top of the significant concessions they made in 2004 and give up their pension so that the Wall Street vulture capitalists in control of this company can walk away with millions of dollars." A quote like this suggests clearly he believes the group of investment firms which own Hostess are rigid, callous, and are not concerned that their actions are playing to the basest fears and needs of their followers.

The union also has accused Hostess of misleading its followers regarding the three plant closings announced on Monday. The company says the union here lacks knowledge - initially there were plans to sell the plants, but those plans were placed on hold until the strike.

Even if the Hostess does liquidate, there is a chance its most iconic brand names - Twinkies among them - could be acquired by another company. If this were to occur, one could argue that action of such high moral character as rescuing Twinkies from oblivion exudes altruism.

I caught a few headlines about the voice of Elmo, Kevin Clash, who was accused of having a sexual relationship with a minor. Then, the accuser admitted that the relationship was consensual and took place when he was an adult. The false accusation was a case of poor moral judgment and a lack of moral character, in my opinion. Clash had to take a leave of absence at Sesame Street because of the environmental stress associated with the situation. Instead of reacting with aggression, Clash was supposedly happy to have the false allegation put to rest, which shows his optimism. (5)

HP recently had to announce an 8 billion dollar error in valuing an acquisition. They claim that the company was CALLOUS lying about their financials during the acquisition process. The leadership at HP is now attempting to STIFLE CRITICISM and are IDENTIFYING SCAPEGOATS (the acquired company) for the transaction. I have to wonder if HP leadership is taking the time to understand HOW THE SITUATION OCCURRED IN THE FIRST PLACE. Before agreeing to purchase this company you would have to think that HP suffered from COMPLACENCY in their way of analysis and did not determine WHO THEY WOULD INJURE when they did not do the required due diligence.

I read an artical about Abraham Lincoln lying to a girl he unitentially got engaged to. He jokingly told a lady, Mary Owens, that he would marry her and she took it serious. He made the decision that he was repulsed by her and later wrote, "...when I beheld her, I could not for my life avoid thinking of my mother ; and this, not from withered features, for her skin was too full of fat to permit of its contracting into wrinkles, but from her want of teeth, weather-beaten appearance in general, and from a kind of notion that ran in my head that nothing could have commenced at the size of infancy and reached her present bulk in less than thirty-five or forty years ; and, in short, I was not at all pleased with her." He influenced Mary in a later letter that she wouldnt like Illinois and that she shouldn't come instead of telling her the truth that he wasn't interested in her. Lincoln was aware of the situation and agreed through a utilitarian approach that lying was the best way out of the situation. He used the courage to leave to get out of there as soon as possible, which was smart from the look of the picture. (5)

http://movies.yahoo.com/blogs/movie-talk/lincoln-mary-owens-m-just-not-002941697.html

The Wall Street Journal and a price-data firm had the courage to challenge the assertion by many top retailers that Black Friday "bargains" are indeed genuine and don't instead just feed followers' illusions of great deals. Their analysis of more than 500 items found that many of this year's most-touted deals were available at lower prices earlier this year - sometimes even at the same retailer!

The story singles out Best Buy, Home Depot, Sears and Target among those engaging in the unethical act of misleading followers. Home Depot and Sears acknowledged on the record that the sale price of certain items was lower earlier in the year, suggesting the courage to assume responsibility and an accountability consistent with the stewardship concept of servant leadership. The response from Best Buy's spokeswoman evidenced a slightly different moral motivation. She noted that, despite a higher price on one item, customers will receive a gift card for $50 off their next purchase.

Nobody's saying that these retailers need to be altruists. But before they pitch as a Black Friday "doorbuster" an item they knowingly sold for less money earlier in the year, maybe they need to ask themselves Whom could this decision or action injure? Apparently not all of them possess the moral sensitivity to do so...

I've been reading the story on Jimmy Savile, a TV star who worked at the BBC for decades. He is accused of abusing and/or raping hundreds of children during his career. If these allegations are true, it's a clear case of someone engaging in criminal acts. Savile misled followers and fans by portraying himself as a charitable person who cared about the well-being of children. Because of the severity of the allegations, one could even say he violated human rights. The BBC is now doing a fundamental review of its ethics policies because Savile subverted its ethical organizational structures. Because of the nature of Savile's alleged crimes, I think it's fair to say he was evil. (5)

There has been a lot of talk about the upcoming problems faced by the country reaching the self imposed fiscal cliff. We need true leaders in our government to step up and have the COURAGE TO PARTICIPATE IN THE TRANSFORMATION of the way the government has worked. The congress needs to set aside their differences and stop IDENTIFYING SCAPEGOATS on the other side of the argument. Our recent leadership in congress has appeared INCOMPETENT and RIGID in their approach to only serve their own party's agenda. For all of our sakes, I hope that we can truly have leaders who have THE COURAGE TO SERVE instead of PROMOTING CRONYISM AND CORRUPTION.

Today I read a story about a Cleveland lady charged with killing her 3 year old soon and putting him in the garbage. They found his body and the waste treatment plant. It really doesn't even have to be stated that this was both evil and callous of the lady. Mother's have the obligation to take care of their children and to use some moral character before acting in such heinous ways. I hope that authorities do not hesitate to take action and make a decision to put her away.

The post title is the title of an interesting opinion piece in today's Wall Street Journal. The author attacks as "fundamentally flawed" the idea that companies have a responsibility to act in the public interest and will profit from doing so. In short, when profits and public interests are aligned (example: salads at fast-food restaurants), he says the idea of corporate social responsibility is irrelevant. When they're opposed (example: pollution caused by manufacturing), an appeal to public interests "almost always" will be ineffective, because executives are unlikely to act for the public interest and against shareholder interests. "Irrelevant or ineffective - take your pick," he writes. I agree, because I believe this is a question of perspective. Executives must adopt a moral motivation that often is not compatible with altruism or communitarianism. They have no obligation to address society's evils. Rather, the courage to assume responsibility must be manifested in action that represents authentic stewardship of a company's stakeholders, whether or not those behaviors be perceived as insular to those outside that circle.

I heard on the radio today that the US government will temporarily ban BP from any new federal government contracts because of "a lack of business integrity" associated with the 2010 oil spill. The company's lack of preparation for such a disaster seemed incompetent to me. The company appeared to lack the awareness of the potential dangers of offshore drilling, which inhibited its ability to take swift action to stop the spill after it started. In the process, BP left its followers (employees and residents of the Gulf region) worse off. After the disaster, BP seemed more interested in identifying scapegoats, such as Halliburton and TransOcean, than cleaning up its mess. (5)

5 television makers have been fined in Europe and Asia for having an illegal cartel and price fixing. This certainly involves ENGAGING IN UNETHICAL AND ILLEGAL ACTS. The leaders of these companies also LEFT FOLLOWERS WORSE OFF, as both consumers and current employees will have to pay the price to the hit to earnings. It appears that none of these leaders exhibited MORAL SENSITIVITY, as they met to price fix and play golf in luxurious locations around the globe. They also haven't examined the SYMBOLIC POTENTIAL of these meetings on their customers. Will customers flee these companies feeling cheated for decades. They also chose a short term position and didn't determine IF THEIR LONG TERM POSITION WOULD BE AS GOOD AS THE IDEAS SEEMED AT THE TIME.

I just saw breaking news from NBC that the Syrian army has loaded chemical weapons onto its bombs to potentially use on its own people. This goes without saying, but using the chemical weapons would be a truly evil violation of human rights. President Assad is known around the world for building a totalitarian regime and stifling criticism from the Syrian people. In the current civil war, he has set his constituents against one another. (5)

I received an corporate email today that my company actually is going through a lawsuit that has to do with ethical practices and it made the media so our CEO was explaining it to us. The CEO had courage to assume responsibility and explained that what happened was years ago when we had a partnership with another company that was claiming invention infringements. The CEO posted the link to our core values page and made it clear that we have a follower's responsibility to make ethical decisions and that our company is made up these values. I wasn't even aware where our core values were listed before this email. It was interesting to see what I'm learning actually happening and the consequences of making bad decisions. The fine we were given was for 392 Million EUR which sounds unfathomable to comprehend that amount of money. I did the conversion and that is around $500 Million. Too bad we didn't win that Powerball lottery the other day because we would have been all set.