If all the parties agree to pursue alternative dispute resolution (ADR), the two important ADR types they may employ in the case are mediation and negotiation. The parties will be involved in the mediation and negotiation with the Internet-based organization (Menkel-Meadow, 2015). However, by using these methods, there are certain advantages and disadvantages that can be realized. For instance, the parties will enjoy advantages such as fast and informal resolution to the disputes, enhanced confidentiality and also it would be characterized by enhanced communication between the parties and this is important in improving the relationship between individuals, especially during negotiation. Also, the methods allow for flexibility in the mediation process where the solutions to the disputes can be directed or made based on the needs and other concerns in the question of the parties and also can be used to address legal and non-legal issues. On the other hand, the disadvantages that characterize the methods can be used as delaying strategies, and the parties can withdraw from the negotiation or mediation before the solution is established. Also, the processes may not result in legal precedents.
Based on the information about ADR, the most appropriate type for Funny Face would be a negotiation. The party should directly get involved in the negotiation with Margolin on the terms since this will aid in keeping the incident out of the media and provide Funny Face with the chance to correct their practice of adding PYR in their product that had not been approved by the FDA.
Based on the concepts of criminal law, corporations or corporate officers can be held liable to the criminal acts. The individuals are considered responsible persons and they form the highest authorities that take part in the approval of strategies and the final products that the businesses deal in, and thus should be made available to answer all the accusations and the consequences of the decisions they have made.
Depended on the classification of crimes in the text, the Funny Face has committed a crime by defying and undermining the FDA by using the ingredients in their products that are not approved. They used PYR in the making of their products without first seeking approval from the FDA, and the ingredient ends up causing harm to the individuals, and this is unacceptable.
Assuming the utilization of the emulsifier PYR at the direction of Chris and based on the criminal law, execution of the crime, for instance, the use of the ingredients that have not been approved by FDA is a punishable act. Chris was responsible for providing the direction to the Novelty Now to use the PYR in place of the compound in Novelty Now’s initial formula to increase the profit.
The WPH process of ethical decision making can be used in the evaluation of various ethical issues in the case. For instance,
· P-Purpose –the aim of enhancing profits at the expense of the individual health
· H-How- the wrong use of the guidelines, that is, using the PYI in the products that are not FDA approved and causing harm on the customers. Also, there is the element of the golden rule.
· Who – the shareholders/stakeholders, owners who were not responsible about the harm the ingredients could have on the people.
References
Menkel-Meadow, C. (2015). Mediation, arbitration, and alternative dispute resolution (ADR). International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences, Elsevier Ltd.
mlo2018
CASESTUDYONE.docx
0
