Business Ethics and Corporate Social Responsibility in Apple

Introduction

Ethics are acceptable moral standards which go beyond legal boundaries but focus on doing the right thing. Business operating both national and Multinational are expected to observe ethical rules which in some cases may differ depending on the countries. The most popular component in ethics is ensuring that a firm does not exploit the employees, disclose correct information about the products and mind the wellbeing of the public at large (Overall, 2016, p.115). So the unethical practices include failure to conform to the set standards of the business operation or inability to do what is right. Some of the exercises may be legally accepted but unethical since ethics goes beyond legal scope. Many businesses fall in the immoral acts trying to maximize profits without considering much about the welfare of the people working for them or the corporate social responsibility entrusted to the firm (Askew, Beisler and Keel, 2015, p. 107). On the other hand, Corporate Social Responsibility involves the ability of the firm to be accountable for changing the people socially with their business operations. In the current times, CSR does not comprise of only the physical operational components but also what the firm stands for (David, 2014, n.p).

Apple Inc. Unethical Practice

Apple Inc. in 2011 was accused of exploiting its employees in China. Apple Company is a multinational company that is the leading in its industry. The unethical exploitation of workers was legally and morally wrong as the government of China outlines that a person should not work for more than 36 hours overtime a month (Chamberlain, 2011, n.p). Apple treated their employees like working machine where they were forced even to take double overtime than stated in the law. The company had gone far much not to care for humanity and took advantage of the employees through exploitation and providing unbearable working conditions. It employed roughly 500,000 workers who were located in China due to cheap labor. The company aimed to exploit the human resources to maximize the Company's profits until it became intolerable that people complained about the poor working conditions.

When the complaints were assessed the situation was even worse and unimaginable. The employees were suffering and were involved in tiresome activities (Chamberlain, 2011, n.p). It was unbelievable such a company that has growth making its way internationally and dominating in the market failing to observe and takes care of its employees. The most scaring part is there were a lot of suicidal cases by most of the employees due to poor working conditions that Apple Company was offering. The company did not take time to investigate the cause of deaths or give the solution to the roots of suicide but went ahead and made people sign an anti-suicidal contract. Every new employee in the firm could not be employed without filling and signing the note and pledge that they will not try to commit suicide.

Due to the high demand for Apple Inc. products around the world, the company went ahead and built dormitories where the employees would live. It made it easier to get in touch with them any time they were needed for work. The bedrooms were small sized, and each room was assigned to 24 people. The standard of living was so pathetic and portrayed the firm as irresponsible and uncaring (Chamberlain, 2011, n.p). Also, staying encouraged disruption of sleep as they would be woken up anytime even the middle of the night to do massive production if the demand was required in some few days. So it is clear that the problems portrayed by the firm are not only unethical but also do not meet the CSR stands and in particular the stand of the company.

From Apple Company case study on employees' harassment, it is clear that other firms can end up in moral crises. In most cases, this happens to companies that are profit-focused, and they can do anything to increase on the earnings without caring about the welfare of the employees, failure to observe corporate social responsibility and other ethical activities. In some other cases, the unethical behavior may not be directly linked to the company since it may be between workers or distributors providing false information about a product. Also mentioned earlier some of the activities may be legally right but depending on the environment the business is operating, the culture or beliefs may prove some activities to be unethical. So it is easier for companies to be involved in unethical practices (Broad, 2014, p. 5).

Kantianism

Kantianism is a deontological theory that the moral compass of right or wrong does not depend on the consequences but rather a fulfillment of duty (Bowie, 2017, p.14). Kant believed a correct action is that which bring more happiness compared to the alternative. The theory poses two significant question to determine the right action. Will everyone support the proposed act? Do the activities respect human goals rather than individual purpose? If the answers to the questions are no, then the Kantian theory term the action as wrong (Bowie, 2017, P.15). According to the case study, Apple was wrong in the act of making their workers' life hard and stepped on their way to willingly do their duty.

If the employees were given a chance to propose how they wanted to work or do their duty, they would not have chosen the Apple Company way since it did not fulfill their happiness. Also, the action itself did not support human goals of working in a productive environment. All along people were being mistreated behind the closed doors of the company to the extent that people who would try to commit suicide were not given their ways out but were taken back to work for the company. For that reason, the company also violated the Corporate Social Responsibility since people would buy their products because they thought the production process was ethical as well as the firm had a moral stand. So, according to the theory, the Company was wrong both ethically and were not Corporate socially responsible.

Ethical Egoism

It is a normative theory that holds that the best interest is that which that contributes to one's interest. It has two forms that are individual egoism and universal egoism (Broad, 2014, p.11). So self-interest and self-happiness is the measure of what should be done and what should not be done. The primary interest of Apple Company in the case is to maximize the wealth of the shareholders as well as their profits. Additionally, they also have a satisfaction once they satisfy their customers in time through modern innovations that led to exploitation of employees. According to the theory, exploitation of the human resources was the best way to achieve all the interests of the Company. So the company did not violate the theory of ethical egoism.

Though China had restrictive laws to protect the right of the employees, Apple Inc. was comfortable since the employees helped them to achieve the company's objectives. They did not concentrate on their welfare of people as long as they could launch different kinds of phones and work on them immediately and tirelessly to avail them in the market in the shortest time.

Utilitarianism

The theory places the act of right or wrong depending on consequences of an alternative (Barrow, 2015, P.22). The main reason a utilitarian will go for a policy is the fact that the plan has the greater satisfaction of the involved parties (Piacquadio, 2017, p.1261). If the outcome of an alternative is not optimal, then it means it wrong. Using the moral aspect of the theory, Apple Inc. violated achieving an optimal result for both the company and the workers. The management of the firm got the optimal benefits of the work done by the employees. But the majority of the employees were upset, depressed and demoralized by the way the company managed their welfare. They were treated like working machines. Through various platforms that the employees used to complain, the company brand was stained which resulted in the loss of cash.

This resulted in the negative consequence of the firm in the region. First had to increase their wages and improve their working condition. The company also had legal fines for breaking the law meant to protect and safeguard the employees of China. The end outcome of the whole activity led to the loss of capital both for the firm and the shareholders.

Organization Change and Strategies to Avoid Future Unethical Practices

Business involvement in unethical practices may lead to loss of the market since most customers buy products from a company that observes ethics and the corporate social responsibility. For that reason, is such occurrence happens later in future it may lead to higher consequences for the firm and the shareholders? First, the Company should ensure they have appreciation program and a platform to air their grievances for the employees (Zuber, 2015, p.168). According to utilitarian theory, employees' appreciation will result in an optimal outcome for both parties. The firm will increase its productivity since people will be working willingly and with the satisfaction which will result in increased profits. Also, it will observe the theory of Kantianism since it will be able to bring happiness to the majority of the people working in the firm (Zamir and Medina 2017, p.7). Overworking the employs to a point some would try to take their life does not bring happiness to the firm or the workers but appreciating them will result in happiness.

Another strategy delivered from Utilitarian theory ensures that employees are divided into working shifts. Since the labor in China is cheaper compared to other countries where Apple manufactures their products, they should allow shifting plan where people will work for a specific limit of time, and others take over (Crane and Matten, 2016, p.15). It will be able for the company be confident on their stand on ethics that will satisfy the CSR standards. Through observance of corporate social responsibility all, the customers, the public, employees, and the management will benefit resulting in the more important happiness of each party.

The firm's culture should be developed to consider the needs and the right of employees and protect them (Tricker, and Tricker, 2015, p.7). Although that in most cases the company may forget about the CSR responsibility and exploit the employees for extra gains, the culture should base on the welfare of the employees. From the aspect of ethical egoism where Apple used during the incidence, they should consider that their interest focuses on the future of the business. For instance, if the company conducts its operations unethically, it may not serve the future interest of the industry once they lose their market due to stained reputation. For that reason, the theory of egoism should help Apple Inc. to focus on the future interest other than the current short-term gains.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the utilitarianism and Kantianism theories did not support that acts and the practices done by Apple violated the rights and happiness of the workers. If the Company has taken a chance to consider the support of the majority in the firm, they would have adjusted since most would be against the actions. The only theory that supported the action of Apple Inc. is ethical egoism that focuses on the self-interest of the shareholders and the firm management. But later after the scandal came to the limelight, it violated the principles of the theory since the consequences lead to a negative reputation that the company had hidden from the public. Regarding corporate social responsibility, the firm failed to be socially accountable to those who believed in it and were loyal to their products. Through...