Assignment 1 Discussion: Employee Health And Safety 186149

Assignment 1 Discussionemployee Health And Safety A Global Perspect

Assignment 1: Discussion—Employee Health and Safety: A Global Perspective BANKS Industries is currently operating in both the United States and China. As a US-based company, BANKS is accustomed to conforming to US law regarding employee health and safety. However, Chinese law is different and, in many cases, offers looser standards for employee protection. Using the module readings, the Argosy University online library resources, and the Internet, respond to the following: From a global perspective, should the company operate under the laws that are provided in each country of operation or should it adhere to the higher standard regardless of where it operates? Justify your answer.

Is this a legal issue, an ethical issue, or both? Justify your answer. Cite at least one example of differences in health or safety standards that BANKS should consider as it moves forward. Explain why this standard should be considered.

Paper For Above instruction

Introduction

Global companies operating across multiple jurisdictions face complex decisions regarding compliance with local laws versus adhering to higher international standards. BANKS Industries, with its operations in both the United States and China, exemplifies this dilemma. The core question revolves around whether multinational corporations should follow the legal requirements of each country or adopt the highest standard universally. This discussion explores the legal and ethical implications of such choices and illustrates the importance of choosing safety standards that prioritize employee well-being over minimal legal compliance.

Legal Versus Ethical Considerations in Multinational Operations

From a legal standpoint, multinational companies are generally obligated to comply with the laws of each country they operate in. This principle ensures adherence to local regulatory frameworks and avoids legal penalties or sanctions. However, legal standards vary significantly worldwide. For instance, U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations set comprehensive safety standards that are often more rigorous than China's safety regulations, which tend to be less strict and sometimes less enforceable. For example, OSHA requires employers to maintain records of workplace injuries and implement safety training programs, whereas Chinese law may lack specific mandates or enforcement mechanisms for similar issues (Roberts, 2018).

Ethically, corporations hold a responsibility beyond legal compliance to ensure the safety and health of their employees. Ethical considerations advocate for adopting higher standards to protect workers from preventable injuries and illnesses. Many organizations opt for such standards to demonstrate corporate social responsibility (CSR), fostering trust and loyalty among employees and stakeholders (Crane et al., 2019). The ethical argument asserts that, regardless of local laws, companies should prioritize employee safety as a moral obligation derived from principles of human rights and dignity.

Should the Company Follow Local Laws or Higher Global Standards?

In aligning with both legal and ethical perspectives, the most responsible approach for BANKS Industries is to adopt the highest safety standards applicable, regardless of the country of operation. While compliance with local regulations is mandatory, striving to exceed these minimum requirements exemplifies a proactive commitment to employee well-being. For example, implementing safety protocols aligned with US OSHA standards in Chinese facilities—such as rigorous hazard assessments and employee safety training—can significantly reduce workplace accidents, thus reflecting a moral and operational commitment that surpasses mere legal adherence (Shen et al., 2020).

Legal and Ethical Dimensions

This dilemma involves both legal and ethical issues. Legally, operating according to local laws ensures compliance and avoids penalties, but ethical considerations demand more. For instance, if Chinese laws permit lower safety standards, solely following them may result in ethical shortcomings, such as neglecting worker safety. Conversely, adhering to higher standards demonstrates corporate integrity and social responsibility. By embracing higher standards, BANKS Industries can also mitigate legal risks by reducing incidents that lead to lawsuits or reputational damage. Therefore, the issue encompasses both legal compliance and ethical duty, reinforcing that responsible corporate conduct should transcend mere legality.

Example of Differential Standards and their Importance

An example of differing safety standards is the permissible exposure limit for hazardous chemicals in the workplace. OSHA specifies permissible exposure limits (PELs) based on scientific research to prevent health issues like respiratory diseases among workers. In contrast, Chinese standards may have higher exposure limits, allowing workers to be exposed to potentially carcinogenic substances at levels that could harm their health over time (Li et al., 2017). For a multinational enterprise like BANKS, considering these differences is vital, as operating under lower Chinese standards might compromise employee health and violate the company’s ethical commitments. Exceeding local standards in China not only reduces health risks but also aligns with the company's global commitment to safeguarding employee well-being.

Conclusion

In conclusion, multinational companies such as BANKS Industries should adopt the highest safety standards possible and applicable across all regions of operation. This approach aligns with both ethical principles and best practices in corporate social responsibility, promoting a safer work environment. While local laws provide a baseline, exceeding these standards can safeguard employee health, improve corporate reputation, and reduce liabilities. In a globalized economy, ethical commitment to employee safety should trump minimal legal compliance, fostering a responsible and sustainable business model.

References

• Crane, A., Matten, D., & Spence, L. J. (2019). Ethical and Socially Responsible Management. Oxford University Press.
• Li, X., Li, Y., & Zhang, H. (2017). Occupational health standards in China and the United States: A comparative analysis. Journal of Workplace Health & Safety, 65(4), 161-169.
• Roberts, S. (2018). Workplace safety regulation and enforcement in China. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics, 24(1), 31-39.
• Shen, H., Xu, Y., & Wang, L. (2020). Multinational corporations and health and safety standards: A case study of Chinese manufacturing firms. Journal of Global Business and Ethics, 14(2), 54-65.