Desparate Air

In my opinion, Nash has failed in his ethical responsibility by not disclosing the presence of toxic and hazardous material to fledgling Industries.

A deontological approach focuses on the importance of responsibility, honesty, and transparency with customers and a consequentialist approach focuses on the potential harm to multiple stakeholders. Nash has failed on both approaches.

Nash was under pressure to make the sale at any cost and that too at the earliest. This seems to have influenced his thought process. He realized that he would never have any repeated interactions with Fledgling industries and therefore it was okay to adopt the easy way out. In the absence of any future interactions with that company, it was not going to be a big deal even if his company’s image got tarnished in the event of any negative impact of the radioactive toxic wastes. Clearly, this is an unethical way of doing business.

Besides, he neglected to consider the well-being of the seniors who will be spending their retired life in the facility by putting them in harm’s way. Though it was not required by law to disclose the information about the radioactive waste, this could have its own cost to the society later on in case of any spills or leaks. According to the principle of utility, an ethical decision should maximize benefits to society and minimize harms. What matters is the net balance of good consequences over bad for society overall. From the society’s point of view too, Nash did not take an ethical stand.

The potential consequences of the sale are as follows -

1) Lives are endangered and it will affect the society at large

2) DAC will lose people’s goodwill and they will shun DAC’s airlines and hotels which will

lead to additional loss in revenues

3) lost credibility with the existing customers and vendors which will further cripple the

company and they will be unable to attract new customers

4) Laid off employees will find it hard to get new jobs...