Pilant’s Business Ethics CBS News
Lauren Bloom writing on her blog, discusses whether or not McChystal’s apology to the President should have been or could have been effective. She believes that the obvious contempt of his staff toward the President made the situation impossible for the general.
I quote: “For an apology to be effective, it has to be sincere. It’s hard to imagine how the general could made a sincerely humble apology after flaunting such arrogance in front of a reporter.”
Two extremes, right? The title represents Chris MacDonald’s last two blog entries. His June 15th entry discusses worker productivity and the World Cup. Here MacDonald asks the question, “How should an important-but-time-consuming cultural event like the World Cup be integrated into the workplace?” You should give it a read.
His other entry is for June 14th. Here he discusses whether or not ethical obligations appear differently under conditions of stress, in this case, in the aftermath of BP’s contribution to the environmental movement. He makes comparison between the Katrina aftermath and the current gulf situation. He concludes with a pretty paragraph. Let me quote it in full.
Now there are of course differences in the two cases. In the Katrina and Haiti cases, people were literally fighting for survival — it was literally life-or-death. Presumably no one in the Gulf Coast tourism industry is literally going to starve to death. But still, the general question remains interesting: to what extent can ethical rules legitimately be bent, when someone’s interests are seriously threatened?
Not a Churchillian statement by any measure but a good summing up.
You could probably avoid a number of my posts by simply putting MacDonald in your favorites and checking him every couple of days.
James Pilant
I despise the Roberts court. After the Citizen’s United case in which the court addressed an issue that wasn’t even brought up in the case to give corporations the same rights as human beings meaning that they could spend unlimited amounts for advocacy. It seemed to me then and now that a paper entity and a citizen of the United States have striking differences.
Many, many people including me get upset when the obviously guilty walk free. I remember when Imelda Marcos evaded conviction with some anger and I could name some more. One of the most loathsome characters in the history of the United States and Canada is Lord Black also known as Conrad Black. This odious figure used a non-compete clause to enrich himself by many millions of dollars. Jeff Skilling, one of the architects of the Enron debacle, is also likely to walk free. It is difficult to contemplate any number of common criminal thefts and robberies that can close to Skillings incredible career of monetary destruction. Yet, it seems today that their convictions will be thrown out because of a Supreme Court decision.
Conrad Black should be in prison. He is a criminal.
Jeff Skilling is a criminal. He should be in prison.
But the Supreme court is right. The issue at question is the “honest services” law. Under the law if you fail to offer honest services you have committed a crime. The problem here is obvious – what are honest services? If you are late to work, are you late, stealing from your employer and thus liable under the law? The law gave enormous discretion to prosecutors, actually the word incredible come to mind. It was more a license to convict than a law. Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman was convicted under the law. His crime was to appoint a contributor to a position in exchange for his financial support for a campaign for a statewide lottery. It was a non-paying position that he had been appointed to several times under previous governors. That’s grounds for a federal prosecution?
What is worse about this whole stinking prosecutorial mess is that I believe that under the law, there were legitimate statutes under which to try most of these men, particularly simple fraud. The time is up for new criminal filings. Because the prosecutors opted for the easiest possible legal theory, there will be no convictions at all.
James Pilant
Ms. Grace explains with commendable clearness the business of being a Systems Analyst and what that entails. To my delight she mentions a knowledge of business ethics in a positive light, not just as a painful and annoying course that one must get through. She has my appreciation. If System Analyst is your thing, a better into would be hard to find.
James Pilant
Can the UN help bring about a world wide change in business ethics. The collapse of the rebranding of British Petroleum is calling into question whether or not the UN initiatives are in any way effective. It is a challenging article I call it to your attention.
James Pilant
