One of the firms which have been recently involved in unethical business conduct is Wells Fargo and Company. Wells Fargo faced a civil lawsuit when it was found that it was engaging in unethical business practices. Wells Fargo was found to be mistreating its customers and employees unethically. Investigations by Mike Feuer, the city of Los Angeles attorney, found out that the current and the former employees were under tremendous pressure to increase their sales. In response to their employer’s pressure, employees resorted to unethical methods to increase sales. To meet their high sales targets, employees executed transactions without the authorization of their customers including issuing of illegal lines of credit and credit cards, and the opening of unnecessary customer accounts. Further, the employees forged customer signature and charged fees on unwanted accounts of customers who were unaware of what was happening. When customers launched complaints, the bank would only partially compensate them and alter their phone numbers so that they could not be reached during customer surveys for satisfaction. Branch managers who failed to meet the target were embarrassed by the community banking president in front of many other managers (Zacks). All these suggest a deceitful, unethical, and illegal business practice. The unethical practices not only affected the employees but it also affected the customers.
The major decision was to meet the company’s sales targets. However, the decision made was wrong, illegal, and unethical. There is manager role conflict in the case. The managers ought to make decisions that are in the interests of the clients/customers and the employer. However, managers had to make certain decisions to protect their own interests.
The decision makers, the managers, and other employees, made decisions which favored their own interests rather than the interests of the customers and the employer. The decisions did not maximize the utility because it results in greater suffering by many. The morally right decision was the one which resulted in happiness for the greatest number, the customers. If another role was favored, it would have resulted in the maximization of utility. The employees would report honest accounts of transactions. However, they would have been punished by the company. On the other hand, the customers would not have been disappointed by the unethical practices.
A utilitarian approach can be applied in these options. The idea is to take an option which will result in the best and do the least harm. The decision needs to be implemented with great care and attention to the concerns of all the parties involved. If the bank is fined, the blame laid on staff, and the clients are compensated, the employees will suffer unnecessarily. The bank would find a reason to punish them even if the bank itself was the root cause of all the problems. The other decision will be to absolve the bank of any blame, accuse the employees, fine them, and compensate the clients. Here again, the employees will suffer unnecessarily. The best decision then is to absolve the employees from any blame, make the bank take responsibility for everything, fine the bank, and compensate the clients.
It looks the decision made by the employees and management was in line with Kantianism. The owners are interested in having as many customers as possible. As a result, the employees are at liberty to do anything possible to meet the sales targets. However, the employees interpreted this to mean they had to meet the sales targets even if the reported figures were not genuine. The appeared to have reasoned that it does not matter whether the manner in which sales were obtained was right or wrong provided they fulfilled their task. Somebody can argue that the employees’ actions of fraud were justified provided that they delivered the highest sales the bank wanted. For a Kantian, it does not matter the process used to achieve high sales. Their only focus is to record high sales.
The decision in the article can be argued by reference to the act utilitarianism. In these circumstances, the right moral course of action would be the one that generates the greatest balance of benefits more than the harm caused to parties affected (Markkula Center for Applied ethics). In this act of utilitarianism, the morally right course of action is the one where the employees make decisions that are in the best interest of their clients. The clients happen to be the majority. They outnumber the staff working in the bank. A decision made against them would result in the greatest harm and consequently unhappiness. On the other hand, a decision made in favor of the customers would result in the greatest happiness. However, the decision might not favor the interests of the employees who wish to protect their jobs.
Works cited
Markkula Center for Applied Ethics. A Framework for Ethical Decision Making. Santa Clara University, 1 August 2015. Web. 24 April 2016.
Zacks Equity Research. Wells Fargo Faces LA Lawsuit for Unethical Conduct. Zacks Equity Research, 05 May 2015. Web. 24April 2016.
