The case study does not lead us to reassess the validity of the arguments advanced by the authors since it enhances the previous readings and continues to build knowledge on the previous readings. Which points or the arguments discussed, do you agree with and which do you disagree with? And why?

I am in agreement with the government having to compensate the workers for the effects suffered by the workers in terms of the compensation package paid out to the employees and the money they had to pay for the cleanup of the environment to revert the harmful effects caused by the exposure to the plutonium.

I disagree with the way the previous owners of the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant hid and refused to disclose the exposure to plutonium. I also disagree with the previous owners for not investigating potential hazards and risks in the workplace in order to make the workplace safe and healthy for their workers.

Conclusion

It is important for every company or organization to carry its activities in an ethical manner. This is important in order for the company or organization to have a good image to the productivity of the employees will be high and the employee retention rate and the motivation of employees will also be high. If the company does not deal ethically, it will experience negative repercussions as evidenced in the huge payouts the federal government had to pay to their employees.
References

Beauchamp, T.L., Bowie, N.E., & Arnold, D.G. (2008). Ethical Theory and Business. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.

James, H.S., Jr. (2000). Reinforcing Ethical Decision Making through Organizational Structure. Journal of Business Ethics, 28(1), 43-58.

Robin, D. (2009). Toward an Applied Meaning for Ethics in Business. Journal of Business Ethics, 89(1), 139-150.