Incident at Morales is a case that provides the reader and the viewers with a moral problem that is arguably confronted at work and home and indicates the ability to attain an ethically supported decision. The case provides information regarding a group of individuals and their safety-related issues to adhere to while working in the factory. Further, the video comes to fruition with a tragic end due to the choices that were adopted by the workers that resulted in the diminishing of plant expenses. In addition, the case involves a grouping of ethical issues opposed by the association, which intended to establish a plant to purposefully create a different compound with the internet of gaining a competitive advantage over its competitors. The case met an ethical dilemma that implied a difficult choice of solving the problem despite individuals excursing their profession with ultimate accuracy. Thus, the managers faced an ultimate ethical dilemma that involved the occurrence of misunderstandings between the team of researchers from India and those in the United States.
Ethical Dilemma
The company struggled with a wide range of challenges in a multitude of business aspects. These included technical, environmental, financial, and safety issues that could arise. Arguably, technical issues were mainly associated with technology-related concepts (Higley & Scachitti, 2021). The core ethical dilemma is rooted in the notion that the company intended to use sophisticated technology, a major concern among the researchers. Therefore, environmental barriers involved the potential risk the plant would result to the ecology. This was mainly linked to hazardous impacts, particularly from the plant’s waste disposal mechanism.
Problems Faced
Financial problems mainly lingered between the parent company’s risk in France. Such action would have resulted in a significant impact on the establishment of the plant. Moreover, safety concerns mainly encircled the workers and occupational safety. Based on the case, the factual issues included health hazards, particularly the worker force, and environmental hazards to the external surroundings. Observably, chemical hazards risk is mainly manifested within the case, and this was majorly seen in the plant chemical regulatory framework. The case indicated that individuals’ health was at major risk, which was also a major ethical issue (Stoll et al., 2020). According to the case, a contradiction in the basic opinions formed the part of conceptual issues. The complexity of the decision attained was another conceptualization manifested in the case.
Facts
In the case of factual aspects, a disagreement between the researchers in India and those in the USA was classified as the conceptual issue in the case. The major stakeholders were Phaust’s Management, the plant owner, based on the case analysis. In addition, Fred Martinez formed the second stakeholder since he was hired to build the plant. Lutz and Lutz were also part of the stakeholders as they were tasked with manufacturing the controls used in the plant. The presented issues are related to the application of technology since the plant mainly relied on modern technology to achieve its objective. Considerably, the plant highly relied on technology to operate core elements such as pressure controls, temperature controls, and other vital components. For instance, the engineers designed a technologically modified design that was questioned by the researchers, resulting in a design disagreement.
Issues Faced
When it comes to key issues faced by the company, the latter will gain directly from the community’s social perception, who are also direct stakeholders as the plant will be serving them. However, negligence to consider the interest of the local community as opposed to the principle of utilitarianism will result in a negative outcome that would jeopardize the plant’s operation (Quaye, 2021). Based on the case, human safety and environmental conservation can be invoked as a high-level rule and implemented by the mainstream ethical, considerate company in its actions. This rule will highly enhance the operational capability of the firm and enable it to put consideration in the promotion of life and the environment. Further, the overall emphasis on the environment will result in more happiness and suitability operation of the plant as the environment would be protected hence availing required resources to the plant.
Relationship with Engineering Ethics
Argumentatively, human safety policy implementation would be an important consideration that would directly impact the safety and the life of the workers within the plant, which is related to engineering ethics. Environmental conservation policy is likely to be critical as it will ensure the restoration of highly volatile environmental resources at risk of depletion. Based on the stipulated assumptions, there are no unwarranted factual assumptions. There exists an instance of unresolved conceptual particular on the safety concepts of the workers. This is evident as no stringent measure has been adopted for mainstream workers’ welfare and safety. Finally, analysis of the argument indicated a comparative absence of fallacy errors since the expertise involvement was put in place before the actual formation.
Impediments to Responsibilities
According to the case provided, the key impediment to responsibilities in regards to one’s ability to respond to the ethical dilemma is evaluating the issues through a legislative approach. This entails the adoption of a code of ethics and following the codes to effectively scrutinize the underlying issues while addressing them effectively (Douglas & Holbrook, 2020). This approach is integral in attaining the solution to both simple and complex challenges. Secondly, identification of the parties involved could be adopted as an alternative to solve the issues.
The conceptual issues mainly indicated the complexity associated with the plant design, structure, budgetary implication, and performance. Further, the contradictory view arising from the researchers who are also experts implies the complexity’s intensity. Therefore, their resultant view was the existence of major complexities that would be solved by integrating minds and consistent review of the plant’s actual structure and design (Albasha et al., 2019). The analysis of the case indented facts that would be resultant from the plant. However, the insight into the actual operation of the plant indicates the occurrence of environmental pollution following the release of wastewater. Wastewater is a dangerous substance containing a series of chemicals that directly impact aquatic life. The plant directly endangered the life of the aquatic species. This view could be instrumental in deciding the case considering the plant’s risks to marine life.
Ethical Approaches
Based on the identified options, the ethical approaches on the basis of my recommendations would include human safety as the best way to handle the underlying issues presented in the cases. My consideration lies in human safety covering the wider scope, including environmental protection. Therefore, the desire to safeguard human life means all actions, including environmental conservation. Based on my argument, a critic could portend an augment based on environmental protection as a mechanism to safeguard human life. This would be motivated by the desires of the environment first.
Ethical Canons
According to Harris’s four standards of ethics, utilitarianism is the most applicable moral standard that can be adopted in this case. Utilitarianism is a moral standard that promotes the execution of actions that maximize the happiness and general wellbeing of the entire affected group (Hegde et al., 2020). Considerably, the plant builders should focus not only on the benefits of the plant and the company but on the greater good of all the individuals within the plant. Therefore, both stakeholders in the case should perceive humans as the major objective and spearhead actions which will mainstream the safety and happiness of the workers, the community, and the entire environment.
However, on the basis of the core ethical canons, I would strongly criticize that agreement basing my facts on humans first. My counterargument is supported by the fact that the environment alone will not be sustainable without human beings. Therefore, there must be human life first for a sustainable environment. Further, it is the role of humans to conserve the environment and not the environment to protect humans. Also, considering the destructive nature of the environment, a human must be present to ensure they keep the environment checked and sustained.
References
Albasha, R., Fournier, C., Pradal, C., Chelle, M., Prieto, J. A., Louarn, G., Simonneau, T., & Lebon, E. (2019). HydroShoot: A functional-structural plant model for simulating hydraulic structure, gas, and energy exchange dynamics of complex plant canopies under water deficit—application to grapevine (Vitis vinifera). In Silico Plants, 1(1), 1-26.
Douglas, E. P., & Holbrook, J. B. (2020). Engineering ethics education for social justice. 2020 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, 1, 1-5.
Hegde, A., Agarwal, V., & Rao, S. (2020). Ethics, prosperity, and society: Moral evaluation using virtue ethics and Utilitarianism. Proceedings of the Twenty-Ninth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 167-174.
Higley, J. B., & Scachitti, S. (2021). Practical ethics for engineering and engineering technology students: Assessing ethics in the classroom. 2020 CIEC, 1-7.
Quaye, R. M. (2021). Utilitarianism and ethics of respect among Obafemi Awolowo University undergraduate students, Ile-Ife, Nigeria. OAU Institutional Repository, 1, 1-13. Web.
Stoll, J., Müller, J. A., & Trachsel, M. (2020). Ethical issues in online psychotherapy: A narrative review. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 10(993), 1-16.