Table of Contents
Introduction: Ethical Issues
Employee compensation issues
Alleged Sexual Discrimination
Wal-Mart: Past and new allegations
Introduction: Ethical Issues (Appendix A)
Wal-Mart had been criticized for its worst CSR practices which includes low wages for the employees (Karen, 2004). Immoral activity of paying low for more and the overtime works had been held (Karen, 2004)
.The quantitative records of designations in the company showed that Wal-Mart had sexual discrimination in its organization (The Economist, 2004). Lastly, severely opposing formation of the union formation within the organization which include aggressive policies for union avoidance.
Employee compensation issues (Wages)
Wal-Mart failed to follow the stakeholder theory, in which the firm should possess moral and ethical responsibility over its employees. The lower salary to the workers for their prolong work was never justify under the management action. Kantianism states that pushing the labourers to work beyond their time bound may affect their social and personal life, thus it is not ethical. The sexual discrimination was the most abhorrent practice persisted: in which the promotions and high remunerative were reduced to women. The moral firm’s action should mind the corporate social responsiveness over their primary Stakeholders i.e) employees but Wal-Mart did not maintain the CSR properly. Work off-the-clock is the moral practice is being follow in modern world by the companies to raise their bottomline. Dominance model of the firm amorally force the workers to work without the valuable benefits. Wal-Mart accepted to pay $ 4.83 million to workers for their overtime work (Hines, 2012). It’s critical to justifying that employees need to work until work has been done. It is completely based on the management model of the company. In some firms appointees were given with minimal work and they asked to finish it on time whereas immoral-management ethics followers pressurize their workers to finish max-work in less duration.
Alleged Sexual Discrimination (Appendix B)
With the evidence, it was proved that the firm had systemic discrimination in the managerial operations. The class-level imbalance statistics in Wal-Mart had shown that income disparity between the genders (Cullen, 2004). On the other side of the spectrum, the women’s personal responsibilities may be the cause of results’ imbalance. Women tend to oppose increased work responsibilities due to family responsibilities. In addition, there were less managerial post applications from women as compared to men (The Economist, 2004). In conclusion it is subjective to determine whether Wal-mart is guilty of sexual discrimination unless women are able to proof it under individual or smaller level. In US, statistics imbalances could be used as evidences of sex discrimination of an organisation. Wal-mart will be proven guilty unless proven that causes of the statistics imbalances are as a result of employee’s contribution (Edward, 1999). Even not proven guilty, some of Wal-mart’s practices are unethical to a large extend. Stakeholder theory encourages organizations to be ethical towards their stakeholders (employees). It includes providing fair working environment and career prospect for all employees (Edward, 1999). About that, Wal-Mart should not neglect employees whom have more personal responsibilities from being promoted because having more personal responsibilities doesn’t represent compromised work standard. In conclusion, Wal-Mart was not violating any labour laws despite statistics’ imbalances unless the known of the cause is determined. However, ethically, it’s their responsibilities to ensure that they strike a balance for both sexes to avoid future misunderstandings.
Excessive power over stakeholders
Wal-Mart destroys local business, downtown areas and the fabric of local...
References: Benson, Kris. "Wal-Mart wages are no problem, Says CEO of Wal-Mart." Wonkette. http://wonkette.com/492744/walmart-wages-are-no-problem-says-ceo-of-walmart (accessed January 27, 2013).
Bernhardt, Annaette. "What Do we Know About Wal-Mart." (2005), http://brennan.3cdn.net/8ba7f4a1b9456459b2_a9m6bnxs1.pdf (accessed January 27, 2013).
Buchholtz, A. K., & Carroll, A. B. (2012). Business & society - ethics & stakeholder management. (8th ed., pp. 22-23). Cengage Learning. DOI: www.cengage.com
Edward Barrett, (1999) "Justice in the workplace?: Normative ethics and the critique of human resource management", Personnel Review, Vol. 28 Iss: 4, pp.307 – 318
Frank, T. A. (2006, April). A brief history of Wal-Mart. Retrieved from http://reclaimdemocracy.org/brief-history-of-walmart/
Karen, O. (2004). Up against Wal-Mart. Mother Jones, 54-59.Trial by checkout. (2004, June 24). The Economist, Retrieved from http://www.economist.com/node/2797105
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes (2011, June 22). Case number 10-277.
Please join StudyMode to read the full document