Exploitation Of Exploitation

Throughout the Twentieth Century, the evolution of workers’ rights in the workplace has drastically evolved. Through the utilization of constitutional freedoms, workers across the nation came together to support the goal of receiving fair treatment from employers when it came to wages, work conditions, and benefits. However, this wasn’t achieved without great sacrifice from the average man as standing up for their rights was a brave act that usually resulted in consequences.

Case one proclaims that the American economy is failing millions of Americans. In today’s day in age, having a full time job does not guarantee an income above the poverty line. Currently, there are “80 government assistance programs” which provide working families the means to survive. It is important to note that these programs cost $153 billion annually, and these costs are covered by the government from the tax revenue they receive from hard working Americans (Myers). Businesses, like Walmart and McDonalds, pay full time employees so little that they live under the poverty line. Businesses can do this is because the government bails them out in the form of the assistance programs provided for their employees, which would be unnecessary if fair wages were paid to their employees. The case questions whether it is moral for well-established corporations to prosper at the expense of the government subsidizing their drastically underpaid employees. In this essay, I will analyze this dilemma through the lens of Utilitarianism and Kantian ethics.

This essay will take a look at two different types of business structures; the capitalist corporation and the workers cooperative, and review how the differing approach to business and the fundamental ideologies of each, impacts ethical practises.

Though the regulations on big businesses had a positive effect on the United states, it seems as if there are not enough. Within large corporations that are ran not completely, but partially by the government, there was a huge gap created that separated the rich and the poor. In the 19th century, during the Industrial Revolution, the structure of the United States economy was transformed. Rapid advancements in technology were made, causing factory owners to gain wealth and prestige. These advancements had a negative effect on the poor because it did not fit their daily spendings or budgets. There are two different regulations set towards big businesses, which are state regulation and federal regulation. A state regulation does not include regulations issued by executive branch agencies, decisions of federal courts,

“While a myriad of laws exist at the state and federal level to protect undocumented workers from exploitation, discrimination and abuse, enforcement is often lax and many in the legal community have turned a blind eye, or worse, have watched undisturbed while their clients commit crimes against humanity” (Lazar). The problem does not reside in the lack of laws that protect undocumented workers, but the lack of willingness from the government to enforce these policies in the everyday workplace. “The current movement of non-profit worker centers across the country—empowering immigrant workers to defend their employment rights and recover their dignity in the workplace—is a vital sign of progress. But it must be complemented with a real commitment from the public and private sector to protect the rights of all workers” (Workplace Fairness). Workers from the Tracy, California factory decided to take things in their own hands, they organized multiple protests against Taylor Farms, they set up a Teamsters accounts, and have also created an Appeal for Justice to inform the CEO of Taylor Farms, Bruce Church Taylor, of the unjust conditions that the workers suffer

Since the time we are born we are fed the lies of capitalism. We are taught that capitalism hurts no one and that capitalism is the only way. Johnson and Robbins have some very influential ideas about capitalism. Johnson writes about the complexity of privilege. He also addresses why some privileged people do not feel privileged through the matrix of capitalist domination. Robbins gives us a background on how privilege became what it is today. He addresses the anatomy of the working class by drawing attention to how they were mobile, divided, powerless, and anxious for a revolution. Through Johnson and Robbins’ eyes we can begin to see how the world is not the one we were taught it was.

The film/documentary, titled Tools of Exploitation, chronicles, analyzes and explains Western civilizations influence on African culture/livelihood throughout the period of colonialism (the film covers the slave trade for a brief moment as well) leading to the modern day. Narrated by scholar/author Ali Mazrui, the film focuses on the usurping of Africa’s future potential due to European powers stymying Africa’s growth for their (Western) own gain (hence the name Tools of Exploitation; Africa was exploited for European gain). The film addresses many factors to why this has taken place but focuses mostly on economic reasons as well as the false justifications Europeans used to colonize the continent.

The Thirteenth Amendment loophole is significantly advantageous for corporations and their executives because they unethically manipulate it to boost their profits.

The United States government has passed 81,883 rules over a nine year span according to audiotech.com. All the regulation passed the last nine years cost the average business owner with about twenty employees over 212,000 dollars extra per year. In total American business owners had to pay over $1.75 trillion to comply with government regulation. The involvement of government in business operations is becoming counteractive. It should be up to the business owner on how he would like to promote his business because it’s his investment that is being but at risk. The government has increasingly been interfering and passing laws on how businesses should operate, from smoking bans, medical coverage too how a business can hire or fire people. The government shouldn’t be so involved on how business operate to include the processes of hiring and firing employees.

As I got older, the knowledge that my father negotiated with his very own employers in order to ensure that his coworkers would also reap the benefits the entire union fought for affected me on personal a level; to know that the man who drove me to school and bought for me school supplies each year also carried a responsibility to his co-workers made me rather proud. However, despite the fact that I grew up the daughter of a Union Steward, I also grew up as a teenager in today’s society: one that no longer suffers from such rampant corruption that induced misfortunes such as illegal instances of child labor: a calamity also solved by a committee aiming to better working standards. My view of labor has always been through rose-tinted glasses thanks to modern times; I really only knew of the exploits that my father had experienced from what he told me, forms recounting various union related news lying in heaps on the dinner table, and snippets on the news or the lightly-touched upon topics in my Consumer’s Education

When the founding fathers first wrote the Constitution, the thirteen colonies refused to sign it without the Bill of Rights for fear that it would turn out like Great Britain. So, they made it a government for the people of the people., for the common good. This was called a Democratic Government. In this government the government had no control over what people said or wrote. One of the initiatives people voted on in this past election (735) was whether or not businesses should have the same right of free speech as individuals. “Initiative Measure No. 735 concerns a proposed amendment to the federal constitution. This measure would urge the Washington state congressional delegation to propose a federal constitutional amendment that constitutional rights belong only to individuals, not corporations, and constitutionally-protected free speech excludes the spending of money. Should this measure be enacted into

Role of the US Constitution and Legal System in Business RegulationThe Constitution of the United States and their legal system have an impact on the guidance and operation of companies in any industry. In case a person breaks a law, for example, he or she may be obliged to pay a fine or even imprisoned in the US. It works the same way with companies: if a business is found responsible for allowing its employees to violate regulations this company is subject to a fine and even closedown. For instance, companies are responsible to guarantee that all employees are legally authorized to work in the United States. Occasionally employees without proper documentation are able to get a job. The law enforcement agencies perform raids on business

In this paper, I will argue that ethical dilemmas, like outsourcing labour, are best approached using the algorithm suggested by Thomas Donaldson; showing that businesses can engage aboard within an ethical manner. To begin I will examine how Donaldson’s “guiding principles” and “core human values” (Donaldson 173) can exist despite different values across cultures. Next, I will consider his premise of ethical leadership and its use in the multinational firm. Having defended these positions, I will then compare his work to that of Ian Maitland. I will specifically address how Maitland’s arguments do not successfully defend the human rights of international employees. This will demonstrate that Donaldson’s argument is more suitable for ethically-driven corporations and sets a positive precedent for future ethical conduct.

The main moral issue in this case study is whether Apple is responsible for the mis-treatment of Foxconn Employees. In this paper, I will use the moral theories of rights-based ethics, moral relativism, and moral universalism as well ethical views from well-known authors Jacobsen and Friedman to explore where Apple 's moral responsibilities should lie. There is no doubt that the conditions at Foxconn are unfortunate, and ought to be improved; however in my opinion I believe Apple is not morally responsible for the mistreatment of Foxconn Employees since Friedman and Jacobsen argue the social responsibility of Apple should not include charitable actives such as supporting Foxconn employees and since what is right or wrong varies between different cultures according to the principle of moral relativism.

Substandard working conditions in the less developed world are usually described as terrible places where employees are subjected to both mental and physical abuse, near impossible quotas, long hours, extremely low wages, and unsafe working conditions compared to western standards. All of this within an uninhabitable environment that corporations knowingly force the world’s impoverished people to submit to. Through pure ignorance, complete disregard, or lack of moral direction, many corporations have taken the concept of