How Workers Were Exposed To Plutonium And Other Radioactive Materials Without Their Knowledge?
Unit II Case Study: Exposing Workers to Plutonium
Columbia Southern University DBA 7632, Business Ethics and Corporate Responsibility
Professor Dr. David Pritchard
Introduction
This case study intends to identify how workers were exposed to plutonium and other radioactive materials without their knowledge. The author explains how the organization had full knowledge about the plutonium contamination that their employees were exposed to and they knew of the health risks as well as the other hazards that employees may incur but still didn’t notify their employees. “Both the employer’s responsibility to inform employees and the employee’s right to refuse hazardous job assignments are the concerns of the essay by Ruth Faden and Tom L. Beauchamp,” (Beauchamp, Bowie, & Arnold, 2009, p. 110). Not notifying their employees of the hazards was wrong. Plutonium contamination would not only affect the plant, it would also affect surrounding areas of contaminating water and other areas around the plant.
Known Risks …show more content…
However the goal of safety is not the primary justification for disclosures of risks,” (Beauchamp, Bowie, & Arnold, 2009, p. 110). Management should make a full disclosure of known risks to all employees even when risks are believed to be insignificant. Full disclosure is necessary because it is the employees’ right to be aware of the dangers that they will be faced with in their working environment before taking a new job, as well as being informed of new hazards that may arise while the employee is working for the corporation. Management should make full disclosure of all known risks; this gives employees the opportunity to make their own decision as to whether or not they want to work under those conditions. Not reporting these known risks is unethical for
Columbia Southern University DBA 7632, Business Ethics and Corporate Responsibility
Professor Dr. David Pritchard
Introduction
This case study intends to identify how workers were exposed to plutonium and other radioactive materials without their knowledge. The author explains how the organization had full knowledge about the plutonium contamination that their employees were exposed to and they knew of the health risks as well as the other hazards that employees may incur but still didn’t notify their employees. “Both the employer’s responsibility to inform employees and the employee’s right to refuse hazardous job assignments are the concerns of the essay by Ruth Faden and Tom L. Beauchamp,” (Beauchamp, Bowie, & Arnold, 2009, p. 110). Not notifying their employees of the hazards was wrong. Plutonium contamination would not only affect the plant, it would also affect surrounding areas of contaminating water and other areas around the plant.
Known Risks …show more content…
However the goal of safety is not the primary justification for disclosures of risks,” (Beauchamp, Bowie, & Arnold, 2009, p. 110). Management should make a full disclosure of known risks to all employees even when risks are believed to be insignificant. Full disclosure is necessary because it is the employees’ right to be aware of the dangers that they will be faced with in their working environment before taking a new job, as well as being informed of new hazards that may arise while the employee is working for the corporation. Management should make full disclosure of all known risks; this gives employees the opportunity to make their own decision as to whether or not they want to work under those conditions. Not reporting these known risks is unethical for