CASE FOR ANALYSIS

CASE 1: Golden Taurus Garment Company

1. Does the company’s current financial condition justify the compensation
given to the employees? Explain.

 No. According to the Labor Code of the Philippines, Book III-

Conditions of Employment, Art. 110, worker preference in case of
bankruptcy, in the event of bankruptcy/liquidation of an employee
business, his workers shall enjoy first preference as regards their
wages and other monetary claims. Thus, it became unlawful if a
company under weak financial condition will not pay their
employees. Furthermore, employees already work hard aiming that
they will be compensated. It will be more stressful in the near
future because employees may file lawsuits against the company
for not paying what is right and just with their offered services. As
Maslow’s theory explains that physiological needs are the primary
human motivational factor and without satisfying their needs makes
an employee uncooperative and make an aggravating situation
that both parties will suffer or most likely create a troublesome
working environment.

2. Is it ethical to deny the employees the information about the company’s

financial conditions & decisions?

 The company’s financial conditions and decisions is a trade secret

but employees are part also of the company whom have the right
to be aware of that information that allows them to understand why
some if these financial concerns are not met. Though, it was not
always making a good effect with both parties, employees always
have the right to decide whether to stay or not.
 3. Is it moral to let employees sign a five-month contract instead of a six-
month contract
 It is moral if an employee was not force to sign the contract and
when he/she should read and understand the ongoing terms and
conditions of the contract. A worker has their own needs so every
agreement he/she involves must somewhat justifies/ satisfies the
needs.

CASE 2: XYZ Cement Company

1. Was the decision of the court fair? Why or why not?

 As per my understanding, the decision is not fair because it mainly

favor the XYZ cement company and not the local residents’
concern. Noise pollution can give a not so good health conditions
to residents within the company vicinity. Paying them one-time with
the equivalent of the damage doesn’t compensate the harm that
they experience everyday. Furthermore, even if the company owns
the property, they should not foster an unhealthy environment. It
will provide an uncomfortable and chaos environment. I do
personally hate a noisy environment when doing some serious
work or sleeping. Noise in great level may distracts you from living
your life the normal way.

2. If you were the owner of the cement plant, what will you do to solve
the problem?

 If I am the owner of the XYZ cement company, I will make a study

for the technology that I can purchased so the disturbing sound
can be eliminated. If a technology is not accessible at the moment,
an alternative option should be applied such as relocating the
residents in a loud where the sound of the company is not greatly
heard.
 3. Discuss the cost and benefit of the case from the perspective of the
principle of Utilitarianism.

 Utilitarian principle explains that “The greatest good is the greatest

pleasure of the greatest number.” In the start of the case, local
residents were happy because there will be an economical benefit
for the XYZ cement company plant operation, and those are
employment of 400 local residents. After certain time, a noise
pollution was visible and harmful to the residents making the
environment not a good place to stay. For the company, they
utilized the place and its human resources but in the long run, it
fosters an unhealthy environment for it’s residents. Utilization of
available resourves is good when it satisfies the common good of
both parties, the company and the local residents. Though,
economically speaking, the offered jobs benefit the local residents,
but if environment is concern, it is harmful now, making the people
unhappy and their environment an unhealthy place to stay with.

COURSE SUBJECT: Social Responsibility & Good Governance (MBA-1B)

SUBMITTED BY: Catherine A. Zuñiga
SUBMITTED TO: Dr. Magdalena Alonzo
SUBMISSION DATE: October 19, 2019