Management Law and Ethics

Question: Discuss about the Management Law and Ethics. Answer: Introduction: The catastrophic failure by the BHP has not only hampered its business and also the environment which puts a strong question mark on the activities of the company especially from the ethical perspective. From the ethical context the company BHP Billiton should have focused on working keeping in mind the ethical code laid down by the Engineers Australia's National Congress which is: Demonstrate Integrity Practise Competently Exercise Leadership Promote Sustainability (Van de Poel Royakkers, 2011). First of all the company has not been able to demonstrate integrity as it was not able to do what is right for the victims in Samarco it is not yet ready to take the blame for the incident. It could be said that the organisation did not calculate all the possibilities of risks and hazard which clearly shows that it failed to demonstrate integrity. In this scenario the company should act honestly and be discerning to do what is right. It is important that the company is able to reassess their activities in the Samarco site and focus on developing the infrastructure effectively in order to be right ethically. On the other hand the company failed to practice competently which has led to this incident and should have been more careful about their knowledge and should have started the work with adequate knowledge which they have failed to do. It is important that the Engineering department of the company develops a strong competent group of workers who are able to gather and practice on t he adequate knowledge established (Van de Poel Goldberg, 2010). The company failed to communicate properly in the Samarco debacle which clearly showed that BHP has failed to exercise leadership effectively in its work and have not been able to reckon the aftermath that goes with mining. In this scenario it is extremely important that the company focuses on establishing and continuously improving leaderships which will help to develop and implement effective ideas even from the ethical perspective. Finally the company has completely failed to promote sustainability with its work. The company was obligated towards the development of the community and the stakeholders where it was working but in Samarco tragedy many people from the local community suffered and also the environment got degraded which is doesnt show the good side of the company and it is extremely important for the company to practice engineering for the development of the health and well being of the people and promote overall health which could be only done with the help of strong planning and implementation as well as by focusing on the public concerns. It is important the company pays compensation to the local people and also try to clean the rivers through effective technological facilities which will act as the compensation done for the damage and from now on the company will have to identify the needs and of the present and future generation from the economic, health, safety and environment perspectives (Hatje, 2016). The catastrophe in the region of Bento Rodrigues is an eye opener for the company in fact for the entire mining industry and hence it is important for the companies to work effectively in order to ensure the security, safety and well being of the people staying in and around the mining regions (Harris et al., 2013). In the recent past there has also been increased concern for the environment and the problem in the state of Minas Gerais only proves the fact that the environmental policies are not being implemented even though they are placed in the environmental books and laws but to see it pragmatically they have never been properly utilised which is a major setback for the organisation (Prno Sloecombe, 2012). After the calamity in Samarco the company BHP Billiton has made a strong environmental research and has also understood the impact that the case has had on the place and its inhabitants. Hence in this scenario it is important for the company BHP Billiton to work out effective measures which will not only helps to act ethically but also helps to act legally as well (Han, 2015). It is important to mention that change in legal policies will have to be used to good effect and hence legal perspectives should be utilised in framing the recommendations (Shum Yam, 2011). The recommendations framed for the development of the organisational activities are discussed below: First of all the company will have to be able to use the evolving standards to good effect in order to develop the mining operations. For instance the suggested legal changes for the company stated by the Ministry of Minas Gerais is to implement geotechnical and structural monitoring which will help the organisation to monitor the condition of the mines and the geographical texture where the operations are being held (Han, 2015). The geotechnical monitoring will help to understand the conditions of thee dams which will help to work accordingly and act ethically to take steps in their repairing which will safeguard the locality and lives and is clearly based on the ethical attribute of practicing competently. Responsible mining could be done with the help of participatory decision making by involving the legal bodies of the place so that the ministry and local legal bodies are kept updated about the position of the place so that quick actions could be taken in order to ensure security and safety for the people living near mines and as per the ethical framework they are sustainable actions. Dam break analysis and contingency planning will help to promote sustainability within the areas as any kind of problems happening could be identified earlier and the company could act early as well (Prno Sloecombe, 2012). The company should also focus on global reporting initiative which would help to keep the legal bodies and even the other stakeholders updated about the movement of the company which legally approved action as well as this helps to show integrity which will largely contribute to the enhancement of the mining operations of BHP Billiton. As per the UN declaration of the indigenous people and their rights (UNDRIP) (2007) the company will focus on promoting sustainability in their operations and work showing diligence regarding the mining operation in different areas and will involve the local and the national legal bodies to ensure the health and well being of thee local people which will help the company to exercise their leadership and also bring about sustainable environmental actions successfully (Harris et al., 2013). The company Better Car Ltd has clearly had all the rules and regulations discussed before they launched their Self driven car in the Australian market. The company has been able to sale quite a few numbers of self driven cars in the country and is planning to sale the cars abroad now in just few months. The company is selling these cars by maintaining legality so that the company does not face any legal problems. The company has made each and every client to sign a documents which apart from having different clauses the company has put in some of the key clauses which clearly state that everyone of the customers will have to be proactive even when the car is self drive mode and should be ready to use the steering wheel in case there is trouble on the road (Cartwright, 2016). This was one of the key clauses that the company had put in. In the agreement it also mentioned that it will bear any liabilities in case of breach of contract which is over the amount of $5000. Unlike the case o f Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co [1893] 1 QB 256 Both the clauses included in the agreement highlights one key thing that is the company has tried to make the consumers aware that even though the car is a self driven one but they have to be conscious about it and hence it could be said that the present agreement is clean (Poole, 2016). It is very unfortunate for Tom to meet the accident but it is extremely important to mention that Tom is equally responsible for the incident that has happened to him and he can no way sue the company for this unfortunate incident. As per the Contract Law in Australia an entity should be able to give all the legal proofs about the damages and for the breach of contract. In brief it could be said that contractors claiming damages for the breach of contract should properly be able to articulate their claims. It is important to mention that the onus will be on Tom to establish compensatory damage claims since it was quite clearly mentioned in the report that one has to be proactive even if the car was on self drive mode (Andrews, 2015). The company clearly stated an exclusion clause regarding the breach of contract for the company and it was clearly signed by the plaintiff Tom which shows that the agreement between them is valid. As stated in the case of La Rosa v Nudrill Pty Ltd [2013] WASCA 18 where the exclusion clause played a huge part and safeguarded the defendant. Unlike in the case mentioned above the plaintiff Tom was clearly aware of the exclusion clause which stated that the company wouldnt be liable to pay money in case of breach of contract. In this case of Thompson v LMS Railway [1930] 1 KB 41 it clearly showed that if the exclusion clause had been put to use effectively this can safeguard the defendant. In that way it could be said that BC should not be sued since the plaintiff understood the clauses and their meaning and since the incident happened for his mistake as well the company cannot be held responsible (Cartwright, 2016). Darlington Futures v Delco Australia is a case which discussed the validity of the exclusion clause and it stated that even though the exclusion clause is constructed it should be done keeping the entirety of the contract in mind and hence it could be said that the company has acted ethically by including the clause stating that in the event of the breach of contract it is liable to pay a maximum of $5000. Hence it could be said that in the present case it is the right of company to reduce it remains partially obligated since there was a technical glitch in self start but it also is important to say that Tom was also responsible for the incident and hence the company is rightful to nullify any claims made by the plaintiff (Poole, 2016). Hence it could be said that in the present case the company upper hand legally which could save it from paying compensation. References Andrews, N., 2015.Contract law. Cambridge University Press. Cartwright, J., 2016.Contract law: An introduction to the English law of contract for the civil lawyer. Bloomsbury Publishing. Han, H., 2015. Virtue ethics, positive psychology, and a new model of science and engineering ethics education.Science and engineering ethics,21(2), pp.441-460. Harris Jr, C.E., Pritchard, M.S., Rabins, M.J., James, R. and Englehardt, E., 2013.Engineering ethics: Concepts and cases. Cengage Learning. Hatje, V., 2016. On Top of a Mining Disaster, Coping with Ethical Issues.Journal of the Brazilian Chemical Society,27(7), pp.1137-1138. Poole, J., 2016.Textbook on contract law. Oxford University Press. Prno, J. and Slocombe, D.S., 2012. Exploring the origins of social license to operatein the mining sector: Perspectives from governance and sustainability theories.Resources Policy,37(3), pp.346-357. Shum, P.K. and Yam, S.L., 2011. Ethics and law: Guiding the invisible hand to correct corporate social responsibility externalities.Journal of business ethics,98(4), pp.549-571. Van de Poel, I. and Goldberg, D.E. eds., 2010.Philosophy and engineering: An emerging agenda(Vol. 2). Springer Science Business Media. Van de Poel, I. and Royakkers, L., 2011.Ethics, technology, and engineering: An introduction. John Wiley Sons. Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co [1893] 1 QB 256 La Rosa v Nudrill Pty Ltd [2013] WASCA 18 Thompson v LMS Railway [1930] 1 KB 41 Darlington Futures v Delco Australia