Page 1 of 8

Ethical Issues of Wal-Mart

Continues for 7 more pages »
Read full document

Ethical Issues of Wal-Mart

  • By
  • November 2010
  • 2655 Words
  • 24 Views
Page 1 of 8
The ethical issues of Wal-mart

Introduction:
A stakeholder is a person or a group that has an investment, share or interest in a business or an industry[1], it can also be classified as anyone that has an influence on the business. There are two types of stakeholders, primary and secondary. Primary stakeholders are necessary for the company’s survival, meaning people from the workers, supervisors, managers, to the customers, shareholders and board of directors; and secondary stakeholders do not typically engage in transactions with the company and therefore not essential to its survival, meaning the media, special interest group, etc. Since they have an influence in the company when there are any changes, they become a very important asset to a business and industry. They can influence in the financial status of the business, the work load and so on.

Wal-Mart has many different types of stakeholders that are involved in the company, within these stakeholders, it can be seen that there are similar treatments to the different groups of stakeholders.

The largest groups of stakeholders are the workers/employees. Wal-Mart employs 1.5 million men and women worldwide[2]. From the 1.5 million, it can be seen that in this stakeholders, Wal-Mart treat male and female differently. They discriminate women. Within all the employees in Wal-Mart, only 10 percent of women are top manager and not to mention that having a lower pay in the same position of a man. Wal-Mart discriminate women in promotion, pay, training and job assignment[3], which they systematically denies.

Wal-Mart also treats disabled employees differently. They had first agreed an amount of $132,500 for two deaf applicants, hiring them to make corporate-wide changes in the hiring and training of new employees who are deaf or hearing impaired. But in June 2001, Wal-Mart failed to carry on with their words of the original court order and therefore was fined $750,200 because of it.

The employees at...