Multinational Enterprises, musings.

[pigspigs76]

soo..... Hi Everyone! Hope you enjoy the read!



A multinational enterprise enforces a code of conduct determining the appropriate management of their sweatshop, this determination intends to support the rights of the individual labourer (both positive and negative) with the sole purpose being: to protect/enhance their own “company image” (their most valued asset). Would the enterprise in turn be using the labourer as a means to their own end? Or does the utilitarian view make an acceptation for this practice as it would be indirectly treating the employee as a human in a situation where they would have otherwise not done so?
I suppose the assumptions I am making are: The company was not required by any force other then their own self interest (attracting more consumers) to implement the new code of conduct. Also, the ignorant sweatshop employee is unaware of the motives for which the company has implemented the new code of conduct . The employees would likely perceive their employer as wanting to treating them with dignity and respect (as an equal human) to justify the use of the services they provide the company. However treating the employee as a human would merely be a consequence of the companies own desire to make more money via the already exploited sweatshop employee.



I apologize if I overcomplicated things...

Look forward to your responses!


If you need me to elaborate on any of this I can try....

I tried posting under "Ethics" but it said something about how I had to post here first idk...

*edit- removed picture... it was a funny joke... but i don't want to offend people with my first post on this forum sooo....

-pigs

[IntoTheLight]

I have no idea what you're talking about, but welcome to the Forum anyways. =)

-ITL-

[xris]

I dont think there are many companies who act in their employees interests for purely altruistic reasons. Labour laws or consumer pressure is the reasoning behind multinational corporate companies. If they can get away with exploiting their work force ,they will. Those who work for them! i don't think they care why they are treated better, they are just grateful.

My father told me there are two things in life that can be said to be nearly worthless , one a wet dream and two a pat on the back from the boss. Welcome I hope you enjoy your stay...

[Theaetetus]

The major issue with the multinational conglomerate corporations is that they are so abstract in their constructions and activities that they are removed from real individuals and communities. The new community is a group of stockholders that do not care about communities that they do business within. This lack of communal ties allows a business to forgo ethics and morality because the day to day operations that float the multinational are not experienced by the real community of a multinational.

Anyway, just a little food for thought. Enjoy your stay here at the philosophy forum!

[pigspigs76]

Originally Posted by Theaetetus

The major issue with the multinational conglomerate corporations is that they are so abstract in their constructions and activities that they are removed from real individuals and communities. The new community is a group of stockholders that do not care about communities that they do business within. This lack of communal ties allows a business to forgo ethics and morality because the day to day operations that float the multinational are not experienced by the real community of a multinational.

Anyway, just a little food for thought. Enjoy your stay here at the philosophy forum!

found an interesting quote which addresses this:
----------------------------------------------
"business is a human activity, it is subject to the same rationally justifiable moral norms as any other human activity. While it is true that MNC (multinational corporations) managers have an ethical obligation to make a profit for the owners of the enterprise, this obligation does not automatically trump other ethical obligations. Indeed, one of the primary tasks of an ethical manager is to balance the competing ethical obligations of stakeholders" -I think it was from "Human Rights Quarterly"

.....

but the question still remains:

If a multinational corporation satisfies its ethical obligations to the stakeholders, including its employees, via the consequences of trying to increase its own company image (in the case where only the stockholder was considered) would they be treating the employees as tools?

*edit: added source of quote

Originally Posted by xris

My father told me there are two things in life that can be said to be nearly worthless , one a wet dream and two a pat on the back from the boss. Welcome I hope you enjoy your stay...

Nice! Some solid words of advise!!!