|
According to Investopedia, a stakeholder in a company is defined as a party that has an interest in an enterprise or project. The primary stakeholders in a typical corporation are its investors, employees, customers and suppliers. However, modern theory goes beyond this conventional notion to embrace additional stakeholders such as the community, government and trade associations. Stakeholders have different views on what is valuable because they have multi-dimensional stakes and different relationships with the firm. Hence, ‘stakeholder value’ means different things to different stakeholders and to a firm’s customers, suppliers, employees, NGOs and investors. Competing interests may exist amongst stakeholders and they may have alternative conceptions on what is valuable (Garriga, 2014) In the Pharmacare scenario, the stakeholders were the employees, investors, medical facilities and doctors. The employees are considered stakeholders because of the role they play in the business. They are responsible for making sure that the supply demands are met. They contribute to the firm in fundamental ways. However, employees actually “constitute” the business: they are in many cases the most important factor or “resource” of the corporation, they represent the company towards other stakeholders and they act in the name of the corporation (Crane & Matten, 2004). The investors, medical facilities, and doctors were the major stakeholders because of the opportunities that they presented to Pharmacare. The investor kept investing in the company while creating a huge market for the drugs that were being sold. The medical facilities continued to prescribe their medicines to their patients. Although it was unethical, the doctors sent them the bogus lists of their patient’s names. By them encouraging doctors to do such unethical things, it is no surprise on how unethical they treated the people of Colberia.
The life and culture of indigenous people across the globe have largely been characterized by their intrinsic relationships to land, nature and environment and the ideals of solidarity of collective identity and autonomy that generate struggles for the preservation of these relationships and ideals (SinghaRoy 2012). Indigenous land rights are the subject of some controversy in international human rights law and are particularly opposed by states and territories in the Americas, Asia, and Oceania, which were “discovered” by European explorers from the fifteenth century onward (Cernic, 2013). PharmaCare really took advantage of the people of Colberia. They knew that these people lived off of their land and were not modernized but were eager to share their knowledge of good health. They took what they learned from these people and became very profitable while allowing the people to live in poverty. Indigenous peoples face threats to their way of life both from their home governments and companies who seek to operate on traditional indigenous lands (Walczak 2010). Due to the rapid growth of Pharmacare, the people of Colberia’s way of life started to suffer. Although their way of life started to suffer, Pharmacare only became more profitable.

The way that the people of Colberia were paid, and the way they worked, can be characterized as modern day slavery. Modern slavery has been identified on every continent. It is most prevalent in sub-continental Asia, West Africa, East Asia, the Middle East, and Latin America but has been uncovered in one guise or another in many developed countries (Crane, 2013). The people of Colberia worked and lived in very harsh conditions. They were paid almost nothing meanwhile, the plant workers and executives lived lavish and lucrative lifestyles.
Allen Jones had one of the toughest jobs to deal with. Although he was hired to operate the “clean room” it was the complete opposite. Because of the mold in the room, it made it a very difficult working environment because people were getting sick and missing work. Because of this people were complaining and he was told to fire them. If he were going to fire them, he needed a good reason to do so and the only person he could have fired would have been Ayesha. She filed a false complaint based on how she personally felt. Although Jones thought that she needed more managerial skills to be promoted, she felt as though she was religiously discriminated against and that is why she was not promoted. According the EEOC, she was not discriminated against.
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). The EEOC enforces laws that make discrimination illegal in the workplace. The commission oversees all types of work situations including hiring, firing, promotions, harassment, training, wages, and benefits. According to the EEOC, religious discrimination involves treating a person (an applicant or employee) unfavorably because of his or her religious beliefs. The law protects not only people who belong to traditional, organized religions, such as Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, and Judaism, but also others who have sincerely held religious, ethical or moral beliefs. Religious discrimination can also involve treating someone differently because that person is married to (or associated with) an individual of a particular religion or because of his or her connection with a religious organization or group. It also states that the law forbids discrimination when it comes to any aspect of employment, including hiring, firing, pay, job assignments, promotions, layoff, training, fringe benefits, and any other term or condition of employment.
If he wanted to fire Tom, it would be difficult to do because is protected under the Whistleblower Act. Allen also needs to realize that he too is protected. He could actually benefit from by being a whistleblower. He could benefit because he would save lives as well as protect himself. Whistleblowing by an employee is the act of complaining, either within the corporation or publicly, about a corporation’s unethical practices. Such an act raises important questions concerning the loyalties and duties of employees. Traditionally, the employee has been viewed as an agent who acts on behalf of a principle, i.e, the employer, and as possessing duties of loyalty and confidentiality (Larmer, 1992). Tom would be considered a whistleblower because of his threats to report the air conditions to OSHA. Donna was displaying some symptoms of mold exposure (ME), it would be difficult to fire her. Common physical complaints in ME patients included fatigue, respiratory problems, recurring bloody noses, nausea, frequent sore throats, headaches, congestion, lung infections, chronic cough, bronchitis, and skin rashes (Baldo, Ahmad, & Ruff, 2002). Although she displayed some of these symptoms, it would be hard for her to file a lawsuit. Another issue to consider is exposure versus injury. An employee merely exposed to mold would not be considered to have suffered a work related injury in most states. She may have a case if her medical records show that her health problems started as a cause of mold in building if she is fired for not being able to properly work.
The best thing that Allen could do to minimize the risk is to allow the worker to take extra breaks. He could also become a whistleblower due to the fact his health is failing as well. As far as the situation with Ayesha, he should explain to her why she has not been promoted and make her understand that her religion has nothing to do with. He could also give her some guidelines to follow to could help her get promoted.
PharmaCARE is a really greedy company and the reason they added CompCARE was to protect themselves if it failed, in which it did. They only care about profits and when CompCARE went under, they quickly got rid of it. There are so many businesses like PharmaCARE that exist. They are not all medical supply companies, they are companies that provide products that we eat, use, and wear. There need to be more research done on companies that are operating in third world countries to see how they are really producing items.

References
Crane, A., & Matten, D. (2004). Business ethics, a European perspective: Managing corporate citizenship and sustainability in the age of globalization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Baldo, J. V., Ahmad, L., & Ruff, R. (2002). Neuropsychological Performance of Patients Following Mold Exposure. Applied Neuropsychology, 9(4), 193-202.
Cernic, j. (2013). State obligations concerning indigenous peoples' rights to their ancestral lands: lex imperfecta?. American university international law review, 28(4), 1129-1171.
Crane, a. (2013). Modern slavery as a management practice: exploring the conditions and capabilities for human exploitation. Academy of management review, 38(1), 49-69. Doi:10.5465/amr.2011.0145
Garriga, E. (2014). Beyond Stakeholder Utility Function: Stakeholder Capability in the Value Creation Process. Journal Of Business Ethics, 120(4), 489-507. doi:10.1007/s10551-013-2001-y
Larmer, R. A. (1992). Whistleblowing and Employee Loyalty. Journal Of Business Ethics, 11(2), 125-128.
SinghaRoy, D. K. (2012). Development, Environmental and Indigenous People's Movements in Australia: Issues of Autonomy and Identity. Cosmopolitan Civil Societies: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 4(1), 1-25
Toxic Mold In Workplace--Media Exposure May Bring On Heightened Claim Activity. (2002). Insurance Advocate, 113(37), 22.
Walczak, a. (2010). Coming to the table: why corporations should advocate for legal norms for the protection of indigenous rights. George washington international law review, 42623.
http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/religion.cfm