Midland Dairy Ethics Case
Facts:
Diana Pierce is a great accounting specialist who holds both the CPA and the CMA certificates. Nowadays she works for Midland Dairy products as a staff accountant and has such responsibilities as overseeing the accounting for the production of products that her employer does sell or distribute. The product line includes standard yogurt and premium yogurt. The price of the latter is twice as big as of the first one. As a result of her professionalism, she becomes a member of the Parent Helper board of directors. This organization takes care and provides food supplements for children at the time when their parents are busy at work.
Diana’s new position obliges her to conduct revisions of the documents related …show more content…
However, in the end, Harrold shares his worries about Pierce’s membership in the board of directors and suggest her to dismiss. He also claims that she needs to review the Midland’s conflict of interest policy and asserts that the mentioned situation is under his personal control. Diana decides to revise the advised material but soon finds out that her employer company has only a conflict of interest policy while it does not have any comprehensive ethics policy.
Ethical issues:
Should Diana act as an employee of Midland Dairy or as a board member of Parent Helper? Stakeholders:
There are five stakeholders involved. The state is the first one as it does pay for the yogurts. The second is Midland Dairy as it gains profit from the used scheme. Another one is the Parent Helper due to the fact that they receive an over-priced product. Diana is doubtlessly a stakeholder as well because she is materially dependent on her employer whose fraud she did uncover. In addition, Pierce’s supervisor is a stakeholder due to his direct duty related to the Parent Helper case.
Alternatives:
A. Diana provides board resignation letter on her supervisor’s (Tom) …show more content…
On the other hand, remaining stakeholders will feel the impact of such action. Not only will Parent Helper keep on receiving the same product for the overcharged price, but also the state will waste money paying for it. As for the trigger of the situation, Diana will face a need in finding a way to keep the fraud uncovered from auditors. Approaching the leaders of Midland Dairy will only have effect if they agree to bring all the money raised on the fraud to the state. In addition, the state will resign the company from the business and might as well make it pay a significant sum of money as a fine. What is more, the leaders will likely fire Harrold as the Parent Helper situation is his direct duty. Informing the state will have a similar impact on all stakeholder except for the state, obviously, and the Parent Helper as it will provide them an opportunity to stand for their interests. If Diana dismisses from her job, the situation is likely to result in the same way as after the first alternative but Midland will have to find a new accountant while there will be no need for Pierce to hide a
Facts:
Diana Pierce is a great accounting specialist who holds both the CPA and the CMA certificates. Nowadays she works for Midland Dairy products as a staff accountant and has such responsibilities as overseeing the accounting for the production of products that her employer does sell or distribute. The product line includes standard yogurt and premium yogurt. The price of the latter is twice as big as of the first one. As a result of her professionalism, she becomes a member of the Parent Helper board of directors. This organization takes care and provides food supplements for children at the time when their parents are busy at work.
Diana’s new position obliges her to conduct revisions of the documents related …show more content…
However, in the end, Harrold shares his worries about Pierce’s membership in the board of directors and suggest her to dismiss. He also claims that she needs to review the Midland’s conflict of interest policy and asserts that the mentioned situation is under his personal control. Diana decides to revise the advised material but soon finds out that her employer company has only a conflict of interest policy while it does not have any comprehensive ethics policy.
Ethical issues:
Should Diana act as an employee of Midland Dairy or as a board member of Parent Helper? Stakeholders:
There are five stakeholders involved. The state is the first one as it does pay for the yogurts. The second is Midland Dairy as it gains profit from the used scheme. Another one is the Parent Helper due to the fact that they receive an over-priced product. Diana is doubtlessly a stakeholder as well because she is materially dependent on her employer whose fraud she did uncover. In addition, Pierce’s supervisor is a stakeholder due to his direct duty related to the Parent Helper case.
Alternatives:
A. Diana provides board resignation letter on her supervisor’s (Tom) …show more content…
On the other hand, remaining stakeholders will feel the impact of such action. Not only will Parent Helper keep on receiving the same product for the overcharged price, but also the state will waste money paying for it. As for the trigger of the situation, Diana will face a need in finding a way to keep the fraud uncovered from auditors. Approaching the leaders of Midland Dairy will only have effect if they agree to bring all the money raised on the fraud to the state. In addition, the state will resign the company from the business and might as well make it pay a significant sum of money as a fine. What is more, the leaders will likely fire Harrold as the Parent Helper situation is his direct duty. Informing the state will have a similar impact on all stakeholder except for the state, obviously, and the Parent Helper as it will provide them an opportunity to stand for their interests. If Diana dismisses from her job, the situation is likely to result in the same way as after the first alternative but Midland will have to find a new accountant while there will be no need for Pierce to hide a