Ethics and morality are philosophical concepts that are understood differently by different people. There are some rules in the society that are aimed to be the norms of the behavior. Business is the same world where norms of behavior also exist. The ethical code of behavior states some issues, according to which the participants of the business should structure their behavior, but every rule has exceptions and people’s understanding of these rules is not always the same. Considering the Blue Star Services & Logistics (BSSL), Inc. it is possible to provide some examples of business situations where people’s opportunity to use the right did not coincide with the right in general.
Honorable Justice Potter Stewart is quoted to have stated, “There is a big difference between what we have the right to do and what is right” (CTU, 2007). This means that the rights which are written for everybody do not always reflect the people’s understanding of the right things. People’s understanding of ethically correct and legally allowed, especially in the business world, do not always coincide. It is impossible to name some criminal situations, but the cases where “what we have the right to do and what is right” (CTU, 2007) differ can be found.
One of the examples, when legal and ethical rules did not coincide, was put into court. The main idea of the trial was directed against Blue Star Services & Logistics Inc. with the complaint that “Being an employer at a workplace, failed to ensure that persons were not lifted or suspended by plant at a workplace, namely a forklift truck” (Department of Commerce, 2009). The complaint was that people were not restricted from using the company tools in personal affairs. People had the right to use those tools and their actions were considered illegal (Department of Commerce, 2009).
The other situation deals with the Blue Star distribution agreement with Oracles. The companies had the right to use and offer the services of each other, but from the customer’s point of view, the costs which are now required to be spared of the Oracles services have increased with the interference of the facilitator company. Such actions are considered to be legal, but at the same time unfair and unethical from the customer’s point of view. The services of the Oracle cost less, but the interference of the Blue Star, the company which managed to “revenue per customer-sale and increases their customer’s perception of Blue Star (RFID News, 2007, par. 6).
Being the distributor of lots of products, the examples when the interests of the consumers and the company do not coincide are numerous. Searching for some information about the complaints to the Blue Star, the refund demand was found. Win Thoms insists on the whole refund which deals with spoiled 1.5 Tons Split AC. The demand is supported by the documents and cheques. Some sum of money was spent in the attempts to fix it. The customer refuses Blue Star services and demands for a refund (Consumer Complains, 2009). Blue Star cannot be required as the accused as this company deals only with delivery. The customers may be understood, but at the same time, Blue Star is legally right and should not return the money.
So, any company has problems in the situations, when the customer (or employee) vision of right actions do not coincide with the managerial staff opinion about the same incident. The understanding of the legal and ethical is seen differently from different sides of the business partners, especially when the case occurs between manager and employee, or between seller and customer.
Reference List
Colorado Technical University Online. (2006). The Legal and Ethical Environment of Business Phase 3 Course Material. Web.
Consumer Complains. (2009). Blue Star 1.5 Tons Split AC Complaints. Refund – urgent notice.
Department of Commerce. (2009). Prosecution summaries: Bluestar Logistics Australia Pty Ltd. Web.
RFID News. (2007) Blue Star, Oracle Sign Distribution Agreement. Web.