Ethical dilemmas in the Jackson Miller asbestos bankruptcy case

Business law, one of the biggest challenges everyone will face is ethical decisions. This is because the choices that are made, must take into account a company's best interests vs. those of the general public. The case involving Jackson Miller is showing how asbestosis is having a negative impact on their financial position. To address these issues, the firm is considering filing for bankruptcy. This will allow them to discharge their debts and negate any kind of claims made against them from the courts.

However, the management has a moral responsibility to those who were impacted by repeated exposure with these substances. To fully understand the best approach requires focusing on the different choices they have available to them. This will be accomplished by looking at their ethical dilemmas, possible rationalizations and various models for resolving the situation. Together, these elements will highlight the best approach and the long-term impact these decisions will have on stakeholders.

Categorize Applicable Ethical Dilemmas

In the case of Jackson Miller, the firm is facing a number of ethical dilemmas in the process of dealing with the asbestos claims. The most notable include: their duty to shareholders / managers, those to the employees and individuals who are affected by repeated exposure. In the case of the shareholders and managers, the company has a duty to protect their profit margins from excessive claims against them. This means that any kind of litigation will more than likely bankrupt the firm after the first round of settlements is complete. ("Resolution of Business Ethical Dilemmas," n.d.)

If this were to occur, Jackson Miller will be forced to file for bankruptcy protection. This will effectively wipe out any kind of equity in the company and the long-term debts on its balance sheet. For the shareholders, this means they will be taking substantial losses from accepting any kind of settlement. While the management, will more than likely lose their retirement savings and not have any kind of viable options for reducing the number of positions at the firm. ("Resolution of Business Ethical Dilemmas," n.d.)

Moreover, any kind of bankruptcy will result in these settlements being effectively negated. This is because they can use the bankruptcy laws to break the agreement and leave those who are impacted by repeated exposure with nothing. When this happens, it will effectively force the victims to waste their time and money going after the firm. ("Resolution of Business Ethical Dilemmas," n.d.)

In the case of the employees, they will lose their job either way. This will occur with the settlement leading to a reduction in claims. While there is the possibility that bankruptcy could lead to plants closing down in communities who are dependent upon them. This means that businesses inside the region will be adversely affected from the increase in unemployment and decrease in consumer spending. If this were to occur, there will be significant shifts in the population and standard of living inside the region. ("Resolution of Business Ethical Dilemmas," n.d.)

However, if the management were to try to remain in business through: fighting the settlements. There is a realistic possibility that layoffs will occur and tremendous amounts of downsizing at various facilities. This will negatively impact their ability to remain competitive inside the marketplace from taking this kind of approach. ("Resolution of Business Ethical Dilemmas," n.d.)

As far as individuals who are impacted from repeated exposure, there is a possibility that they could see a reduced settlement or none at all. This will take place with the company filing for bankruptcy protection and having any kind of judgments against them negated. At the same time, if they were to fight these issues it will lead to greater amounts of suffering from those who are impacted. This will have negative implications on their families and ability to seek out continuing treatment because of their condition. ("Resolution of Business Ethical Dilemmas," n.d.)

These different elements are showing how Jackson Miller is being placed in a no win situation. This is occurring based on the fact that any kind of actions will have negative impacts on different groups of stakeholders. The only way that they can avoid these consequences is to determine the varying degrees it will have on them. ("Resolution of Business Ethical Dilemmas," n.d.)

Using the Ethics Modules Resolve the Situation in the Problem

The Blanchard and Peele model is focusing on several different questions to understand ethical behaviors and how it is influencing everyone. The most notable include:

Is it legal?

Is it balanced?

How does it make me feel?

These different elements are providing company officials with insights about how these challenges could be effectively resolved.

Utilizing this approach, it is clear that these issues will more than likely lead to a better outcome for stakeholders. This will occur with Jackson Miller using the bankruptcy laws (which are legal). To break any kind claims that is made against them. This will ensure that the firm is following the various regulations through utilizing a tool. That many other firms in the past have used to deal with these challenges. ("Resolution of Business Ethical Dilemmas," n.d.)

In this aspect, the model is being followed by ensuring that the company is utilizing various aspects of these ideas with this option. When this happens, the company will not have broken any kind of legal guidelines and engaged in tactics which are used to often address these issues. It is at this point, when the company will address these challenges over the long-term and become more economically viable in the process. ("Resolution of Business Ethical Dilemmas," n.d.)

At the same time, this strategy is very balanced. The only drawback is that there will be short-term pain (in varying degrees) for different stakeholders. This means that the firm can remain in business when the bankruptcy is occurring and maintain their competitive position inside the marketplace. This will help them to deal with any kind of negative effects and ensure that they are economically viable going forward. ("Resolution of Business Ethical Dilemmas," n.d.)

The way that this will make people feel, is to have mixed emotions about what is happening. This is occurring, with the bankruptcy hurting those who were harmed by repeated exposure to asbestos and the negative effects it will have on stakeholders. In this aspect, these issues will cause regret about the incident and the pain it is inflicting upon others. ("Resolution of Business Ethical Dilemmas," n.d.)

However, if the firm were to file for bankruptcy and reorganize, it will deal with the long-term consequences of the litigation that is taking place. This means that the company can move forward and will not harm employees or local communities (who depend upon it remaining in business). Over the longer term, this will ensure that company can continue to benefit these stakeholders and provide them with resources to help them. ("Resolution of Business Ethical Dilemmas," n.d.)

In this aspect, the Blanchard and Peele model is demonstrating how there will be positive benefits from going into bankruptcy. The only real challenges will be the immediate short-term impacts these decisions will have on stakeholders. However, over the longer periods, is the point these changes will lead to positive benefits. That will help a variety of stakeholders in the process. ("Resolution of Business Ethical Dilemmas," n.d.)

However, Immanuel Kant's beliefs are much different. This is because it is focused on the idea of doing unto others as you would have done to you. When this is applied to Jackson Miller, these kinds of insights will place the firm in a no win situation. This is occurring through highlighting the underlying amounts of harm that will face, if it were to deal with the negative consequences of the litigation (by settling). When this happens, managers will be forced to go into bankruptcy, in order to address these challenges or face the possibility of liquidation. This will have negative consequences on a variety of stakeholders. ("Resolution of Business Ethical Dilemmas," n.d.)

As a result, the best approach is to utilize the Blanchard Peele model on ethics for resolving the situation. This will result in the least amounts of damage and it is ensuring that the organization remains economically viable well into the future. When this happens, the company can protect its employees and communities who will feel the negative effects. This is the point they can introduce changes that will help everyone to move forward. ("Resolution of Business Ethical Dilemmas," n.d.)

Clearly, the best approach for Jackson Miller is to going into bankruptcy and to use the courts to eliminate any kind of awards from asbestos claims. This will have a positive impact on stakeholders over the long-term by providing them with a way of eliminating any negative consequences as a result; this means that the best model is the Blanchard Peele theory. This is because it can ensure that the firm is following the different regulations and that they are meeting the various guidelines imposed on them.

At the same time, it will reduce the negative consequences on the organization and their ability to deal with these challenges. When this happens, the company can restructure and make certain that these issues have been rectified completely. Any other approach, is only delaying the inevitable. This will lead to the same consequences and only prolong these problems even further. To avoid these challenges, managers must be focused on meeting these objectives at all costs.