In this case, Iverson violated the CWA, the WAC and the Olympia code. But he refuses it and appellate. The case show that he asked to accept the water waste but it refused. However, he kept doing it in next ten years without permission. Also, the scale of discharged was spread out during each year. In 1985 to 1988, without permission from court because he fails to get accept, he personally discharged and ordered his employee to do so. The discharged go through the appellant’s sewer drain department and his own home also. In 1988 he pays to a company to dispose the wastewater. In 1991, they also begin to ship the drum to outside of contractor. When he fires his employee, he moved to work this process in the new warehouse. This process until
…show more content…
Base on the WPH framework for business ethics, the decisions must meet three primary criteria to consider as an ethical. Iverson have not met any of the criteria. First, the decision affects the particular group. The manager should think the question “whom would this decision affect?” when making decision. I think Iverson fail to do so. Open this business without the permit is violating the law. But, he tell the employee he have the permit. This decision affect to the employee. He makes his employee violating the law without knowledge. The decision affect to all people in society because the pollutant. Second, the decision making should toward an ethical end. His decision leads harm to all the society. Discharged wastewater makes environmental pollution. That is the cause of many kind of illness. It is not toward an ethical end; it is toward personal profit. And finally, the decision must meet the standards of action-oriented business behavior. He doesn’t know how to make ethical decision. He did not responsible for his behavior. The ethical decision should make him proud of. Thinking about his discharged be on the television, there are nothing to proud of. People would yelling at him because his business is one of the cause to destroy our Earth. If he thinking about other person open the business and do discharged as him does, and he is the employee of this business or the person who get ill because of the pollution. Probably, he will saying that person is ethical. And, he just did what people called unethical
Base on the WPH framework for business ethics, the decisions must meet three primary criteria to consider as an ethical. Iverson have not met any of the criteria. First, the decision affects the particular group. The manager should think the question “whom would this decision affect?” when making decision. I think Iverson fail to do so. Open this business without the permit is violating the law. But, he tell the employee he have the permit. This decision affect to the employee. He makes his employee violating the law without knowledge. The decision affect to all people in society because the pollutant. Second, the decision making should toward an ethical end. His decision leads harm to all the society. Discharged wastewater makes environmental pollution. That is the cause of many kind of illness. It is not toward an ethical end; it is toward personal profit. And finally, the decision must meet the standards of action-oriented business behavior. He doesn’t know how to make ethical decision. He did not responsible for his behavior. The ethical decision should make him proud of. Thinking about his discharged be on the television, there are nothing to proud of. People would yelling at him because his business is one of the cause to destroy our Earth. If he thinking about other person open the business and do discharged as him does, and he is the employee of this business or the person who get ill because of the pollution. Probably, he will saying that person is ethical. And, he just did what people called unethical