Surabhi Yadav: GS4 answer copy

• Company's reputation saved
• won't be blacklisted

Cons

• cognitive dissonance
• promote other salesman to do the same
• taxpayer's money misappropriated
• staff that informed would be discouraged to give any future information

Option 2: Report to the government.

Pros

• moral integrity & business ethics upheld
• suitable actions against staff & government officials could be taken
• upheld other staff members morality and also instill fear of doing anything wrong.
• Can ensure impartial inquiry into the government matter & present the report to govt
  • Discuss course of Action
  • Future amends to prevent such loopholes
• can help the company from being blacklisted
• The inquiry & course of Action can also put goodwill among people & moral highgrounds of the business

Cons

• government could still punish company for defrauding.

(c) The case presents the issue of law v/s ethics. No law can prevent a person who's morally corrupt. (d) Despite Prevention of Corruption Act → issues like 2G scam, fodder scam come to surface. But still, laws & stringent measures are necessary to regulate one's moral behaviour. (e) Passing of RTI Act has upheld accountability & transparency in governance. (f) So, we need to have a balance, organisational measures need to be taken to prevent loopholes but a person should also be trained morally to uphold integrity.

(d) Company can take following

Measures -

• Training of the staff on business ethics with CEO & Mr. Sharma.
• Lead by example: walk the talk
• Ensure such deals are tallied by higher position.
• Check & Balances among various departments.

Uphold Gandhian principle 'Commerce without morality is a sin'

"We need to shift our focus from short-term profit to long term value creation for all stakeholders, including employee, customers, community at large."

• Paul Polman.

The above case includes various ethical dilemmas - Issues:

(1) Right to profession v/s Corporate Social Responsibility

(2) Rights of young girls v/s Right to flash strike & stop work

(3) Rashmi's right to work as a Social welfare professional.

(4) Law enforcement responsibility of not being able to stop child marriages by themselves

(5) Morality of the Management

(6) Belief of men that their women are corrupted by the progressive ideas.

(b) An Implementable Course of Action

1- Rashmi should report the violence against her, ensure her personal safety. 2- Next, she should try to persuade the management authorities to call a meeting with the union leaders. 3- She must convince them of the social sin they're committing, sensitise them about child's Right. 4- She could also persuade by deterrence of legal action that can be taken against management & workers for promoting child Marriage under Prohibition of Child Marriage Act. 5- She can also go talk to women of the village along with her team. If women will stand by her, she'll gain strength.

It'll not be a great idea for Rashmi to involve local administration beyond ensuring her safety, it'll only worsen the sensitive issue & won't make social impact desired by Rashmi.

(c) Companies should take responsibility -

1- Obligation to serve the community they live in 2- Benefits the society as a whole

However, they deter because -

1- Profit motive only 2- Don't want extra responsibility 3- Lack motivation.

However, companies through CSR should not only contribute funds, but do social audit to ensure impact & rise on high moral ground.

(d) Reason for aggressive reaction: -

1- Patriarchal mindset, how can a woman manipulate their women & give them voice of their own. 2- Low on Emotional Intelligence 3- Societal construct 4- Belief that outrage can lead to subordination of others.

Rashmi should handle workers by

• Talking to them
• Talking to women
• Conducting workshop for men.