Multinational Corporations And Global Justice

Impartiality and Fairness

Discuss about the Multinational Corporations and Global Justice.

The world has increasingly become smaller due to the globalization of companies seeking to tap into new markets and enhance their business fortunes. As a result, there is the movement of labor, knowledge, and technology across the globe to complement and meet the need of competent, innovative and skilled expertise from all walks of life. These movements take the role of ensuring that people come together and work collectively in a movement to achieve certain aspects that could not have been otherwise achieved when done individually.

Increased globalization in the business world has necessitated companies to comply with standardized rules and regulations for various reasons anchored to its reputation and smooth operations. Compliance to ethical and human rights issues has become vital to organizations’ operations and culture. This has, therefore, forced companies to re-align their core business activities to reflect ethical standards and human rights considerations. Those that disrespect the rules are automatically subjected to scrutiny from industry-peers, media, and the general public

Besides, authorities have developed a significant interest in the human rights largely due to a wave of increased illegalities and unfair treatment of workers which includes the use of child labor, low wages, discrimination and unsafe working environment. Advocating for such rights at the individual level is difficult, and thus, the coming together helps to enhance and manage the aspects (Stark, 2010).

Corporations have the mandate to enforce the universal human rights standards through systems and procedures laid in collaborations with their external stakeholders. To this effect, organizations have committed resources to align their organizational structures and processes to human rights dictates to enhance the reputation of the company and increased the probability to gain market share and acquire a competitive edge (Ronnegard, 2015). Further, in a bid to uphold the rights of its employees, the company achieves motivation and high productivity from its workers through some of the below-discussed practices.

All staff ought to be subjected to equal standards of treatment without favoritism or discrimination. Practicing these ethical standards ensures the human rights to fair treatment is not interfered with in any way. This measure is vital to the organization’s unity and morale towards a common goal and objective. Unfair and impartial treatment undermines the human rights, and people feel out of the place which affects their freedom (Valdman, 2009). Thus, every business organization is expected to consider this ethical aspect and ensure that it treats its employees fairly.

Preservation of Employee Privacy

Organizations practice transparency through sharing information openly within and without the company. Part of the information pertains the procurement activities of the organization, recruitment, and promotions. Nevertheless, confidential information of the company is reserved for security, competitive purposes and privacy of its employees. By being transparent, companies present an opportunity to the general to scrutinize and evaluate the dealings. The media also plays a watchdog role in examining corporate organizations and revealing any unethical conducts. Restricting people from accessing the organization’s information hampers the rights of people (Scherer, 2015). Therefore, every business organization is expected to practice this ethical issue to ensure that all the stakeholders have information regarding the organization.

Ethics demand for the organization to provide its employees with protective gears to prevent them against burns, cuts and other forms of injuries. This measure is consistent with the human rights to health and safety in a working environment. Every business organization must establish and understand all the safety issues that exist in every job position and put in place every required safety measures to ensure that employees are safe (Snyder, 2009). Some of these actions include the providing the workers with the necessary protective gear to enhance their safety. Every business organization must ensure that the employees are working in the safe and comfortable conditions.

Telecommunication companies are at a high risk of violating the rights to privacy of their clients and workers due to pressure from authorities. Accessing of private information and tapping to the conversation of people is a massive breach of their security because it exposes the affected to fraudsters and cyber crimes. Such a case violates the privacy rights of people (Powell  & Zwolinski, 2012). Example, Internet companies including Google have resisted the pressure from security agencies to allow access to private data and information of its customers is thereby compromising their safety making them vulnerable (Zwolinski, 2007).

Organizations have human resource management that endeavors to investigate into their employee’s frustrations and addressing their concerns to achieve maximum productivity from their labor and equally sort their rights (Strudler, 2017). Further, it is through this functionality that the culture of ethics is cultivated in the organization through rules, regulations, and systems supporting standards best practices. This is critical in helping the companies grow to increase the productivity of people which in turn improves the profitability of the organization.

The corporate social responsibility is practicing ethics, fairness, and generosity to both the internal and external stakeholders to the organization. Ethics demand the team to reciprocate for the hospitality of the host communities through rolling various projects including infrastructure, enlightening the locals on new issues including health and education. The company donates resources and knowledge to the host community in a bid to improve their quality of lives. This is a positive initiative that serves to empower the community both economically and socially which upholds their human rights in various quarters. The organization’s corporate social responsibility does not only help the people and community outside but also brings many benefits to the company. These include its ability to bring about the business sustainability of the organization (Lee & Kotler, 2013).

Corporate Social Responsibility

Ethics demands organizations to conserve the environment and ensure depletion of natural resources does not happen. On this grounds, companies are forced to dispose waste responsibly and contain their emissions so that it does not cause health hazards to the local community. It is the interest of authorities to ensure its people are not harmed by activities of companies infringing on their health rights (Wettstein, 2009). Therefore, every business enterprise is expected to be an environmental steward and activities that can negatively affect the environment.

Business enterprises ought to analyze challenges obstructing the full and efficient implementation of the ethical regulations which is consequential to systematic human rights risks. Among the distracters to the achievement of ethics and human rights is the cost involved to roll-out these practices. Due to this, some companies have resolved to set up their operations in countries with cheap labor and lenient human rights laws, as a strategy to cut down costs (Werhane, Hartman, Archer, Englehard & Pritchard, 2013).

Companies bend toward respecting and practicing human rights to gain enhanced reputation and longevity of their businesses among other benefits. They learn in the length of time how to make human rights commitment their culture within their companies and in partnership with external stakeholders. Enterprises that excel at human rights implementation over time are then able to communicate their successes and gain trust with consumers and investors (Ellis, 2007). Also, firms that are ethical and respect human rights are highly attractive to skilled and competent professionals across the globe.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the presence of a clear guide and standards of human rights practice enables organizations to have a level field of business activities and prevent them from potential lawsuits that can potentially damage their reputation. Additionally, companies can organize cross-functional activities that involve the leadership of the organization from top to bottom which enhances free interaction and socialization of the employees. This is in a bid to break the barrier of superiority and promote the human rights to freedom of expression and socialization at free will.

References

Ellis, C. (2007). Telling secrets, revealing lives: Relational ethics in research with intimate others. Qualitative Inquiry, 13, 3-29.

Lee, N. & Kotler, P. (2013). Corporate social responsibility: doing the most good for your company and your cause

Powell, B. & Zwolinski, M (2012). “The Ethical and the Economic Case Against Sweatshop Labor: A Critical Assessment,” Journal of Business Ethics, 107(4): 449-472.

Ronnegard, D. (2015). The Fallacy of Corporate Moral Agency, New York: Springer.

Scherer, A. (2015). “Can Hyper norms be Justified? Insights from the Discourse-Ethical Perspective”, Business Ethics Quarterly, 25(4): 489–516.

Snyder, J. (2009). “What’s the Matter with Price Gouging?”, Business Ethics Quarterly, 19(2): 275–293.

Stark, A., (2010). “Business in Politics: Lobbying and the Corporate Campaign Contributions,” in G.G. Brenkert and T.L. Beauchamp (eds.), Oxford Handbook of Business Ethics, New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 501–532.

Strudler, A. (2017). “What to Do with Corporate Wealth?”, Journal of Political Philosophy, (25)1: 108–126.

Valdman, M. (2009). “A Theory of Wrongful Exploitation,” The Philosophers’ Imprint, 9(6)

Werhane, P., Hartman, L., Archer, C., Englehardt, E. & Pritchard, M. (2013). Obstacles to the Ethical Decision-Making: Mental Models, Milgram and the Problem of Obedience, New York: Cambridge University Press.

Wettstein, F., (2009). Multinational Corporations and the Global Justice: Human Rights Obligations of a Quasi-Governmental Institution, Stanford, CA: Stanford Business Books.

Zwolinski, M. (2007).  “Sweatshops, Choice, and Exploitation,” Business Ethics Quarterly, 17(4): 689–727.