The move to South East Asia will definitely affect several functioning structures among all the stakeholders involved. Regardless of this, the company needs to make a move that is beneficial to them and in this case, the main factors considered are production costs and the proximity to the target market. In all aspects, this seems to be a positive move; however, the company does not consider the employees in North Carolina who will be left jobless considering the big move. Of course, several stakeholders are against the move simply because it goes against the contract and in this case employees in the North Carolina firm will be the major people who will be affected by the move. The company is tasked with the social and ethical responsibility to safeguard the rights of the employee and should not terminate their employment without considering their wellbeing. In this case the code of employment ethics need to be considered (Columbia Southern University, n.d).
Having said this it is unethical for the company to terminate the contracts of its employees prematurely just to meet its needs. The employment contracts signed by the company are legal and binding and this implies that the company may face legal action for breaching their contracts. To add on this, the company has put its interests on the forefront and has ignored the needs of the employees who will be left jobless in North Carolina. Following Peslak’s views on ethical frameworks, the teleological was not considered in this case since the company gave a blind eye on the needs of the employees. They had their best interests at heart and facilitated the move irrespective of the outcomes that it would cause. The workers in North Carolina will need to look for other jobs since their source of livelihood will be tampered with. In as much as the move will be beneficial to the company, the employees will suffer as a result and this is not ethical. In this case, the teleological framework was ignored since the company made a decision that is beneficial to it as opposed to benefiting employees. In this type of framework, the consequences of the actions taken need to show that there are more positive outcomes as opposed to negative outcomes; this is clearly not the case for the workers at the North Carolina plant. The company does not put them into consideration in the choices it makes, the outcomes are rather negative than positive (Peslak, 2005). However, in this case, the company was faced with a different situation, which may be beneficial to other people; however, the move may not necessarily be beneficial to all parties involved.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
According to the law, a contract is a legal and binding documents and this means that the employees have the legal right to involve authorities in this manner. This means that the company can be sued for premature termination of the employment contract and there will be legal consequences. To avoid such instances, the company needs to have compensation measures and mechanisms such as monetary compensation in the event that the employee’s contract is terminated prematurely. In this case, this will be the ethical thing to do other than just terminating the employees contracts and dismissing them without considering how they will move on with their lives. Employees have to be protected at all costs and this means that the company needs to look into issues such as early retirement measures that need to be addressed in the event of sudden contract termination. The decision to move from North Carolina will be unethical considering the lives of employees at the plant will be greatly affected by such a move (Stanwick & Stanwick, 2009).
References;
Columbia Southern University. (n.d.). BBA 3651 unit V lesson. Retrieved on November 28, 2018. https://online.columbiasouthern.edu/CSU_Content/courses/Business/BBA/BBA3651/15P/Unit_III_Lessonpdf
Peslak, A. R. (2005). An ethical exploration of privacy and radio frequency identification. Journal of Business Ethics, 59 (4), 327-345. http://dx.doi.org.libraryresources.columbiasouthern.edu/10.1007/s10551-005-2928-8
Stanwick, P. and Stanwick, S. (2009). Understanding Business Ethics. New Jersey, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
