Ethics Assignment: Morgan Davis
Wicked Wal- Mart
2013
Part One
An example can be found, with Wal-Mart as the culprit, for nearly every type of unethical business
practice in existence. News articles, papers, blogs and books are written about Wal-Mart’s
unethical: treatment of employees, health insurance, wages, working conditions, unions, overseas
labor, bribery, taxes, unsafe products, construction and the list goes on. With all of these different
examples of ways in which Wal-Mart has acted unethically, it was hard to make a selection of which
to investigate further. I have, however, chosen to focus on one case in particular, in which Wal-Mart
intended to financially benefit from the injury of one of its employees, and did not back off until
public outcry threatened profits.
Sequence of events
1999: 51 year-old, Deborah Shanks, takes a job at Wal-Mart stocking shelves1
February 2000: Deborah signed up for Wal-Mart’s health and benefits plan.2
May 2000: Mrs. Shanks’ mini-van is struck by a tractor-trailer, leaving her with permanent brain
damage, including loss of short-term memory, she was confined to a wheel chair, and moved into a
long-term care facility for her constant needs.3
2002: Shank family wins $1 million dollar law suit against trucking company.4
2002: Court places $417, 000, amount remaining after legal fees, in a trust fund for her long-term
care, meaning she received no funds directly, and therefore had no money to give Wal-Mart. 5
August 2005: Wal-Mart’s health plan sues Mrs. Shanks for $470, 000 it spent on her medical costs..6
August 2006: U.S. district judge rules in Wal-Mart’s favour, due to the fine print of the contract,
which states that Wal-Mart can recoup the expenses it paid for medical care if the injured person
also collects damages for injury from a lawsuit.7
1
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119551952474798582.html
http://articles.cnn.com/2008-04-02/us/walmart.decision_1_wal-mart-retail-giant-health-care-plan?_s=PM:US
http://articles.cnn.com/2008-04-02/us/walmart.decision_1_wal-mart-retail-giant-health-care-plan?_s=PM:US
4 http://listverse.com/2011/09/13/top-10-unethical-business-actions/
2
3
5
http://listverse.com/2011/09/13/top-10-unethical-business-actions/
6
http://articles.cnn.com/2008-04-02/us/walmart.decision_1_wal-mart-retail-giant-health-care-plan?_s=PM:US
7
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119551952474798582.html
1
March 2008: CNN tells the Shanks’ story8
March 2008: Online petitions and angry blogs spring up to boycott Wal-Mart. 9
Outcomes
March 2008 (one week after CNN tells the story): Wal-Mart sends a letter to the shanks saying it
will amend its health care plan and not be seeking reimbursement.
March 2008: "Wal-Mart will not seek any reimbursement for the money already spent on Ms.
Shank's care, and we will work with the family to ensure the remaining amounts in the trust can be
used for her ongoing care. We are sorry for any additional stress this has put on the Shank family,”
stated Wal-Mart.10
Lessons Learned
One can only hope that Wal-Mart learned a few lessons with this case, the first being that a
company cannot and should not be able to profit from the misfortunes of its employees. Secondly,
Wal-Mart may have learned that public opinion is very persuasive when a company’s profits are
threatened by potential boycotts of loyal and casual customers. Finally, Wal-Mart has hopefully
followed through on its statement that the health plan will be reviewed and incidents such as these
will not reoccur. A major lesson here is that not all happenings in the business world are cut and
dry, so a business must be aware of each incident and be willing to amend its protocols.
The selection of this case of Wal-Mart vs. Employee provides an example of a negative role model
for me. Though I may have ambitions to start a business of my own, and perhaps even expand to
multiple locations, or franchises, I have learned from this story that as a business owner, you must
look at the small details of even the largest picture. By painting all incidents with the same brush,
Wal-Mart failed to realize that sometimes extreme circumstances merit a different approach.
Though many people pointed out the fact that the Shanks family would be left with less money than
they had before they sued the trucking company, and that Mrs. Shanks would not be able to receive
the care she needed if Wal-Mart did sue them, the law suits went on. This is a perfect example of a
situation of a huge corporation, becoming wrapped up in the logistics of paper work, and ignoring
the fact that some situations need to be given particular attention and special consideration. WalMart was stopped in its tracks when public outcry threatened its profits, and it was clear that it was
headed into a public relations nightmare. Though Wal-Mart was able to pull out off the crisis with
little negative impact to its image, it is obvious that it has an unethical approach to how it treats its
employees.
As a potential aspiring business owner, I will approach these types of situations with compassion
and consideration. Though Wal-Mart was on firm legal ground, it failed to understand the impact it
was having on the individuals, and failed to re-evaluate its approach until damages to the company
8
9
http://articles.cnn.com/2008-04-02/us/walmart.decision_1_wal-mart-retail-giant-health-care-plan?_s=PM:US
http://articles.cnn.com/2008-04-02/us/walmart.decision_1_wal-mart-retail-giant-health-care-plan?_s=PM:US
10
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/story?id=4566641&page=1
2
were on the horizon. I have learned to treat each business situation individually, and be willing to
compromise for the betterment of the company, the employees and the customers.
Part Two
Though it may be argued that there can be a split between personal and business ethics, I believe
that business professionals, and everyone else for that matter, should strive to lead by example.
When considering the Ethical principles, each can be applied to your personal life, and your
professional life, but there can be negative implications to following any principle absolutely.
Consider the Egoism Principle. Though it states that one’s moral obligation is to them only, it can be
approached in an ethical and unethical way
Egoism Principle Example
Acceptable Scenario: When applying for a job, one always tries to make themselves stand out, and
convince the hirer that they are indeed the right person for the job. In this case, your only moral
obligations are to yourself, even though receiving the job position, means another person won’t get
it, the impact of your actions on others is irrelevant.
Unacceptable Scenario: When two people are vying for the affections of a third, and one candidate
mentions that the other candidate has a bad reputation and has unresolved personal problems, the
impact of these actions have a negative impact on other candidate. Though the impact of these
actions seems irrelevant to the first candidate, it is morally wrong, as the other candidates
opportunity has been lost because of the negative impression given.
By following the Egoism Principle, one can also apply the Right Principle. These two scenarios could
easily be reversed, but in each case there are two possible outcomes; one in which each candidate
has a fighting chance as the first candidate respects the moral rights of the second, and one in which
a candidate acts immorally and violates the rights of the other.
The Duty Principle can then be taken into consideration if you assume the position of the hirer or
the love interest. In the situation of the job application, the person interviewing should do the
ethically right thing and interview both candidates and hire the one which is right for the job. In the
case of the love triangle, the love interest should still consider the candidate with the supposed bad
reputation, and make their own judgement, because it is the right thing to do.
By applying the Duty Principle, you can also incorporate the Utility Principle. If in both scenarios,
the applicant is given the opportunity to speak for themselves, and the decision maker considers
both equally, then this right moral action will result in the best consequences for everyone. Even
though in each situation there is a proverbial ‘winner’ and ‘loser’ all candidates were given a fair
opportunity and should be able to accept the decisions, whether favourable to them or not.
In these scenarios, and many others, I believe the only principle to follow is that of the Virtue
Principle. In exercising ethical virtues such as; honesty, loyalty, respect, compassion, courage,
responsibility and self-discipline, moral decisions can truly have more positive outcomes.
3
Personally, I believe people should follow an Empathetic Principle. If you are making a decision,
consider everyone it may impact, and try to upset as few people as you can. Act with discretion and
compassion, in your personal and professional life, because when it comes down to it, we are only
one person, therefore we need to act morally and ethically in every action we take. Our personal
and professional lives reflect each other, and any immoral action made in either, can reflect poorly
on the other. Hold yourself accountable for each action you take, and think about whether or not
you would mind that action being made public. If you feel as though public knowledge of any one of
your actions would reflect poorly on yourself, reconsider.
That which is private or professional can always become public, so act with discretion and
empathy and make the appropriate moral decision.
4