1
The Ethical Dilemma of Ellon Husk: A Multi-Framework Analysis of Corporate
Responsibility and Consequences
Students Name
Institutional Affiliation
Course Title
Professor
Date
2
The Ethical Dilemma of Ellon Husk: A Multi-Framework Analysis of Corporate
Responsibility and Consequences
Utilitarianism, developed by philosophers like Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill,
is an ethical framework that judges the morality of actions based on their consequences. It
aims to achieve overall happiness or well-being for the most significant number of
individuals. From a practical standpoint, it is still being determined whether Ellon Husk's
actions are ethical. The success of PESLA gave employment opportunities, contributed to tax
generation, and offered public transport to many people. All these favourable impacts
positively affected many people in society. However, recklessness in safety concerns and
environmental policies caused deaths and raised health hazards, which the company
engineered. Though not as extensive, these negative impacts are very dire.
A utilitarian analysis must weigh these competing factors. The deaths and health
impacts, even if they involve fewer people, intuitively appear to outweigh the more dispersed
economic benefits. Moreover, the future consequences of emissions fraud may affect many
more people and the environment. Accordingly, a utilitarian approach would consider Ellon’s
actions as detrimental to the people's overall well-being.
Comparing this to virtue ethics, which is based on the nature of the person rather than
repercussions, offers a new view. According to Aristotle's theories, virtue ethics focuses on
values like compassion. According to this measure, Ellon’s conduct – deception, recklessness
of human lives, and greed as the guiding values – would be summarily denounced. This
statement, "morals are for the weak," is opposed to virtue ethics as a theory of morality.
A deontological ethical system attributed to Immanuel Kant categorizes actions
according to the principles governing their performance irrespective of the outcome.
According to Kant’s catеgorical impеrativе, it is wrong to act in any way that would not
make it possible to turn thе actions into a univеrsal law. Based on this principle, Ellon’s
3
actions arе as follows: lying, chеating, and knowingly еndangеring livеs arе all flagrant
violations. A deontological approach would also be highly critical of Ellon’s actions while
weighing much less on the consequences of the actions.
To some extent, the statement made by Milton Friedman about corporate social
responsibility may refer to Ellon’s approach, as PESLA did focus on generating profit for
shareholders. Nevertheless, this perspective is debatable, and Friedman does not excuse the
companies from legal and ethical responsibilities. Ellon’s actions, therefore, are more of an
extreme profit focus where he went to lengths of ignoring laws and even endangering lives.
Regarding stakeholders, PESLA's actions would likely elicit varied responses:
1. Employees might feel conflicted – benefiting from jobs but potentially uncomfortable
with unethical practices.
2. Customers would likely feel betrayed upon learning of safety issues and emissions
fraud.
3. Communities near manufacturing plants might appreciate economic benefits but be
concerned about environmental impacts.
4. Government regulators would view the company's actions as a severe breach of trust
and law.
Stockholders' reactions could be mixed. Still, short-term investors might be impressed
by PESLA’s financial results. However, long-term investors may be worried about possible
legal and reputational losses that may negatively influence future profitability.
4
References
