Union Carbide 's Chemical Plant

Another corporation that operated unethically was Ford Motor Company with the production of the Ford Pinto. To compete with international competition and achieve Lee’s goal of producing the Pinto within a small time frame led to designing and manufacturing flaws. This resulted in a fuel tank design that would put the Pinto in a combustible situation should rear end accidents penetrate the poorly designed fuel tank. Realizing the design malfunction and deciding how to fix the fuel tank

The movie a Civil Action covers the Woburn Case which was Anne Anderson and other small families who decided to sue the companies Beatrice Foods and W.R. Grace. The reason for Anderson and the other families to decide to sue was because they believe the companies dumping of poisonous chemicals was the reason to their children’s leukemia deaths. However, when they reached out to Jan Schlichtmann to handle their case he was not the most positive on wanting to help them, “Ms. Anderson, our firm is very small, three attorneys that's it, which means we can only take on so many cases at once and we have to be very careful on the ones we do take because we can't afford to lose, our clients pay nothing, we pay everything, and the only we get paid back

B. What position in the ValuJet organization did Sabretech fill, why was this a problem? If this were your company would you have used them? ValuJet hire Sabretech, owned by Sabreliner, and licensed by the FAA to perform critical work. If I was a manager for this company I wouldn’t of hire Sabretech. By looking at Sabretech I can see that they were lacking an ethical structure. A Structure that should represent various systems, position, and programs of a company to encourage and support ethical behavior. Such as whistle-blowing an employee disclosure of illegal, unethical practices. By encouraging whistle-blowing employees would not delay in telling regulatory agencies. Perhaps in helping avoid any future tragedy like this one.

Indubitably, the company wronged the consumers and passengers by violating their rights to not be killed in a car fire and their right to minimal health

Many companies have ethical decisions that need to be and sometimes those decisions can affect many individuals or just a few. Making ethical decisions may be placed solely on one person’s shoulders or it may be a decision that multiple individuals must be involved in. There are several ethical issues in the Richardson Drilling case that should be considered. For instance, bribery, purchasing substandard parts with lack of disclosure that causes injuries, and revealing sensitive information. One potential ethical concern that could arise has to do with ongoing health insurance and the employer’s responsibility.

Doe v. Unocal Corporation case is well-known and complicated, however, this long lasting series of trials gave an opportunity to small individuals be on a par with large corporation in terms of the Alien Tort Claims Act (ATCA) and other International laws. The ATCA was founded in 1789 and allows foreign citizens to bring civil lawsuits in the US courts for damages caused by violations of the law of nations and treaty of the United States. Recently, it has been largely used to bring legal actions against companies working in other countries, for example, in cases of environmental threats (Globalpolicy.org, 2016). If these claims are allowed to proceed ATCA can rightly be considered, as a powerful tool for increasing corporate responsibility.

This case study analyzes the experiences of Courtland Kelley at General Motors (GM). Courtland Kelley a third generation GM worker put his job on the line by pushing the GM managers and executives to fully respond to the safety issues found while working as a safety inspector at the company. Kelley along with his supervisor Bill McAleer first discovered the issues while auditing GM cars at rail yards across the country, a spot check of vehicles before the cars were cleared to be delivered to the dealers. McAleer was taken off the audit as a result, who subsequently sued the company seeking whistle-blower protection. The case was eventually dismissed by a judge in favor of GM. The judgement only increased Kelley’s

Both parties consulted their attorneys whose guidance instructed them that they did not have to disclose the information. The motivating factor in both decisions was to protect the livelihood of their companies. The facts of the information that had been revealed to each company had not been proven.

Cordeaux Gabelle is still claiming damages of 14.6m even though I argued that section 11 of Securities Act 1993 is not relevant in this case, because the company was sold privately and not by public offering. I supported my argument by Supreme Court ´s decision in Gustafson v. Alloyd Co.

Race, class, gender, pragmatism, social justice, and other sociological factors play an important role in many tort cases as well. There are many tort law perspectives by which a tort case can be analyzed namely: Law and Economics; Corrective Justice; Critical Race Theory; Critical Feminism; Pragmatism; and Social Justice. In this essay I am mainly bringing out the facts of the tragedy and the importance of Law and Economic Perspective, which favors an industry such as the Union Carbide Corporation (UCC) in this case, and also the Social Justice Perspective, which speaks in favor of the people of Bhopal.

Bhopal is the capital city of Madhya Pradesh, the largest and one of the most economically depressed states in the nation. At 1970s, the public health infrastructure, sewage and waste system in Bhopal are still in very poor condition . Besides, mass casualty emergency response system also lacking in Bhopal.

Question 1 Summarize 1 one page how you would explain Enron’s ethical meltdown: Enron was an energy company founded by Kenneth Lay in 1985 through a merger of vast networks of natural gas lines. Enron specialized in wholesale, natural gas, and electricity, and made its money as a wholesaler between suppliers and customers rather than actually owning any. Enron in fact didn’t own any assets, which made their accounting procedures very unusual. The lack of accounting transparency at Enron allowed the company’s managers to make Enron’s financial performance better than it actually was. The organizational culture at Enron was to blame for it’s ethical meltdown. Enron’s accounting scheme slowly began to erode its ethical practices, which soon led the culture of Enron to become a more aggressive and misleading business practice. Enron reported profits from joint partnerships that were not yet attained in order to keep stock prices up (or make wall street happy). As this was happening employees began to notice the ethics in senior management (leadership) deteriorating, and soon after they to would follow in their footsteps. Senior management thought they were saving their company from financial ruin and though lying was ok if it meant saving the company. Investors would surely sell their stocks if they really knew the situation the

Generally speaking, the legal system didn¡¦t play a very active role in this case. First of all, the India government could do more on digging the truth of the gas leak out and set a more strict standard to regulate such dangerous

Frank, manager of corporate reporting at Amalgamated Forest Products, has threatened to go public with information regarding a falsified report on the effect of effluent controls on the discharge of wastewater from pulp and paper companies, which has angered his boss, Jim McIntosh and the company’s president, Jim Letourneau. Letourneau was to testify before a legislative subcommittee the following week and use the report, “Endangered Species: The Pulp and Paper Industry in the Upper Peninsula”, to give the industry’s perspective on proposed legislation. The section of the report which contained the falsified financial information was prepared by Tina

Four days after this accident, in April 1985, the Indian government filed a complaint in the federal courts in New York on behalf of the victims. UCC announce that the case should be heard in the courts of India due to the vast majority of material witnesses and documentary proof bearing on causation of and liability for the accident is located in India, not the United States, and would be more accessible to an Indian court than to a U.S. court. The records and all documents were written in Hindi or other Indian languages, understandable to an Indian court without translation. Also, the witnesses for the most part do not speak English but Indian languages understood by an Indian court but not by an American court.