Chiquita Banana
What is the responsibility of a business or corporation? Is it to meet stakeholder expectations and follow legal guidelines, or is there a higher responsibility? While Milton Friedman asserted in his famous essay that “the social responsibility of a business is to increase profits,” it can be argued that companies also have higher moral responsibilities. The question in each ethical dilemma is, “To whom do we have a moral responsibility?”
In this module, we will analyze the Chiquita Banana terrorism case and apply legal, ethical, and international perspectives, as well as analyze the managerial and public policy implications of Chiquita’s actions.
Contents
•Background - Chiquita Banana Terrorism Case
•Legal Perspectives
•Ethical Perspectives
•International Perspectives
•Managerial and Public Policy Implications
•Conclusion
•References
Background - Chiquita Banana Terrorism Case
Chiquita Brands International, the well-known banana supplier to the United States and abroad, had an incredibly profitable venture in Colombia since 1899. The company’s presence in Colombia contributed almost $70 million annually to the local economy, and had generated about 12,500 jobs.
However, the presence of long-standing civil war, unrest and drug-trafficking in the country led to the emergence of paramilitary groups—illegal armed groups whose stated purpose was to protect themselves and others from violence by guerilla groups. These groups often demanded extortion payments from multinational corporations.
In 1997, Chiquita’s South American subsidiary began funding Autodefensas Unidas de Colombia (AUC), a paramilitary group that made a deal with Chiquita to protect the company’s local employees from murder and violence in Colombia in exchange for “security payments.” The payments were not acknowledged on Chiquita’s books until September 2000, when an internal investigation by Chiquita of its South American arm revealed the payments to the company’s board of
In this module, we will analyze the Chiquita Banana terrorism case and apply legal, ethical, and international perspectives, as well as analyze the managerial and public policy implications of Chiquita’s actions.
Contents
•Background - Chiquita Banana Terrorism Case
•Legal Perspectives
•Ethical Perspectives
•International Perspectives
•Managerial and Public Policy Implications
•Conclusion
•References
Background - Chiquita Banana Terrorism Case
Chiquita Brands International, the well-known banana supplier to the United States and abroad, had an incredibly profitable venture in Colombia since 1899. The company’s presence in Colombia contributed almost $70 million annually to the local economy, and had generated about 12,500 jobs.
However, the presence of long-standing civil war, unrest and drug-trafficking in the country led to the emergence of paramilitary groups—illegal armed groups whose stated purpose was to protect themselves and others from violence by guerilla groups. These groups often demanded extortion payments from multinational corporations.
In 1997, Chiquita’s South American subsidiary began funding Autodefensas Unidas de Colombia (AUC), a paramilitary group that made a deal with Chiquita to protect the company’s local employees from murder and violence in Colombia in exchange for “security payments.” The payments were not acknowledged on Chiquita’s books until September 2000, when an internal investigation by Chiquita of its South American arm revealed the payments to the company’s board of
References: Abrams, S. (2010, October 06). [Web log message]. Retrieved from http://www.chinahearsay.com/how-many-foreign-companies-in-china-violated-anti-bribery-laws-last-month/ Associated Press BBC Monitoring Asia Pacific. (2012, January 11). China party says corruption "still severe" in country. Accessed by LexisNexis Academic, 9 February 2012. Chatterjee, S., Sarker, S. & Fuller, M.A. (2009), A Deontological Approach to Designing Ethical Collaboration. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 10, 138-145. Edwin R. Micewski & Carmelita Troy (2006), Business Ethics – Deontologically Revisited. Journal of Business Ethics, 72, 17-25. Howard, A The Special Litigation Committee of Chiquita Brands Internationl, INC. 's Motion to Dismiss and Incorporated Memorandum of Law, 08-01916-MD (United States Districe Court Southern District of Florida February 25, 2009). United States District Court, CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, (2009). Securities and exchange commission vs. avery dennison corporation. Retrieved from website: http://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2009/comp21156.pdf United States of America v