The development of prisons was a result of the need to create fear which was essential to enable authorities to deter crime. Crime is punished by upholding good conduct in the community. The political philosophers of the enlightenment formed the new idea of using Imprisonment as a form of punishment in 18th-century Europe. The philosophers believed that the problem of crime by men was a result of the poor use of power by the state and not from the sinful nature of men (VerstehenVideo, 2011). The American civic leaders felt that their new republic was an excellent platform to try new ideas that had developed. Since the philosophers felt that people had to be led by reason and treated with respect, Imprisonment emerged as a punishment.
The primary goal of Imprisonment as a form of punishment is to deter potential offenders from committing crimes. The fear of being incarcerated is seen as a powerful deterrent, as it can prevent people from committing crimes in the first place. The concept of retribution or “eye for an eye” justice is also used as a form of deterrence, as the punishment should be equal in severity to the crime committed. By having punishments that fit the crime, the justice system sends a message to potential offenders that crime does not pay and that the consequences of their actions will be severe. This theory has been used throughout history to justify Imprisonment as a punishment for certain crimes. Additionally, it is used as a form of incapacitation because it was aimed at controlling the offenders and preventing them from offending again.
The stated goals of the punishment of Imprisonment are to protect society from offenders, to deter potential offenders from committing crimes, and to rehabilitate offenders so they can return to society as productive citizens (VerstehenVideo, 2011). These goals are achievable if the right conditions and resources are in place to support prisoners and help them reintegrate into society.
This punishment comes from the Latin phrase “corpus punire,” which means “to punish the body.” Corporal punishment is a means of discipline and control and a form of punishment in many cultures and societies throughout history. The related theory is that physical pain or discomfort can be used for deterrence, and the goal of this punishment is to discourage further misbehaviour by teaching the individual the consequences of their actions (Morris & Rothman, 1998). Some corporal punishments included getting flogged or enclosure in an iron maiden which felt like being buried alive (NFB Canada, 2015). The people, especially women accused of being witches, had to confess because they could not bear the pain of torture. Corporal punishment ensures that other people avoid involvement in actions considered witchcraft making deterrence possible. In the modern era, corporal punishment is not encouraged because it is seen as an act against human rights.
The stated goal of corporal punishment is to correct negative behaviour by instilling a sense of fear of punishment. This punishment is a way to discourage children from engaging in destructive behaviours. Whether this goal is achievable is a matter of debate. Some argue that it is an effective way to modify behaviour, while others argue that it can have unintended consequences and is not a lasting solution. Ultimately, it is up to the individual to decide if they believe corporal punishment is an effective way to modify behaviour.
Various theories and historical contexts over the centuries have influenced the development of the death penalty as a punishment. Proponents of the death penalty argue that it is a crime deterrent, as the fear of execution can prevent people from committing serious offences. They also argue that it is necessary to ensure justice and to punish people who have committed the most serious crimes.
In the middle Ages, the Catholic Church developed its theory of justice and retribution, including capital punishment. This theory relied on the belief that God was the ultimate judge and that justice came from His divine will. The Church believed that anyone who interfered with God’s will deserved capital punishment and those midwives were highly involved. The Church accused the midwives of interfering with the women’s bodies and giving birth control work that belonged to God (NFB Canada, 2015). The punishment seemed to prevent more crimes against the Church hence working as deterrence. It was evident during the burning times when women accused of witchcraft were executed as criminals. Deaths were conducted by drowning and burning the individuals accused of witchcraft (NFB Canada, 2015). In the early modern period, the development of the death penalty was heavily influenced by Enlightenment thinking. Enlightenment thinkers argued that the death penalty was a necessary form of retribution and punishment for the most serious offences. They believed that capital punishment was a deterrent to crime and a way to maintain social order.
Use of Fines
The concept of fines as a form of punishment has a long history, dating back to ancient Greece and Rome. In those societies, fines punished and discouraged criminal behaviour, as well as generating revenue for the state (VerstehenVideo, 2011). In the middle Ages, fines were a form of retribution for offences, with the amount of the fine corresponding to the severity of the offence.
The modern concept of fines as a punishment was developed in the late 18th century, influenced by the Enlightenment philosophy of utilitarianism. This philosophy argued that punishments should achieve the greatest possible good for the most significant number of people and that the punishment should be proportional to the offence (Wilf, 1989). This philosophy led to the idea of fines being imposed for offences to incentivize people to obey the law and discourage criminal behaviour without requiring lengthy prison sentences or other forms of punishment. This idea was further developed in the 19th century and has evolved into the concept of fines as a form of punishment used in many legal systems today.
The goal of fines as a form of punishment is to discourage criminal behaviour and incentivize people to obey the law. This goal is achievable through using fines as a form of punishment, as the threat of a fine can act as a deterrent for potential offenders. Additionally, fines can suit the severity of the offence, allowing for a more proportional punishment that is more likely to be effective.
NFB Canada. “The Burning Times.” YouTube, NFB, 2015, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=34ow_kNnoro&t=5s. Accessed 19 Jan. 2023.
Morris, N., & Rothman, D. J. (Eds.). (1998). The Oxford history of the prison: The practice of punishment in Western society. Oxford University Press, USA.
VerstehenVideo. “Eastern State Penitentiary (1998).” YouTube, 2011, www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ikUWU3cbq8. Accessed 19 Jan. 2023.
Wilf, S. R. (1989). Anatomy and punishment in late eighteenth-century New York. Journal of Social History, 22(3), 507–530.
Use Of Drones In Law Enforcement Operations Free Essay
How law and order are sustained is one of the most persistent issues a liberal society must address. There is a natural tradeoff between liberty and the maintenance of order through the creation and execution of laws, and these characteristics alone could generate much discussion. However, the United States and numerous other modern countries are undergoing a profusion of technology that significantly improves the user’s sensory and motor capacities. If the user is the state, the issue over alleged invasions into the private lives of residents is intensified. The employment of drones by police enforcement for emergency responders, evidence gathering, and kidnappings is generally not contentious. However, police utilization of drones for mass surveillance and demonstrations may be controversial as it may infringe on several human liberties, including the right to privacy which involves data confidentiality, freedom of opinion, the right to demonstrate, and freedom of travel. There must be an equilibrium between these rights and public security. Therefore, this Research concentrates on determining legal and moral issues with the police’s usage of drones and addressing these considerations. The paper emphasizes that the threat is not the drone device directly but how it is utilized and how the authorities handle, analyze, and react to the data collected to deter or control crime. If no protections are in place to limit ubiquitous surveillance, monitoring may show itself as government dominance and authority. It should be determined if local drone policing is often so invasive that its disadvantages exceed its advantages for public safety reasons. The approach in which these concerns are handled could be a precedent for nations exploring the utilization of drones by enforcement agencies. This paper will employ the meta-analytical research approach, where information from the existing literature is analyzed to develop significant conclusions about the effects of using drones.
Drones, also known as unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), can take to the air without the aid of a human pilot or other crew members. Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) are the flying components of an unmanned aircraft system, which also includes a ground-based controller and a communication link (Maghazei, Lewis, & Netland, 2022). Drones are changing the nature of public safety just as body cameras and other innovations have. Improve the security, efficacy, and openness of remote incident response services. In the United States, 910 state and local law enforcement officers have used drones for law enforcement or other public safety operations, according to Research by the Bard Institute. The problem is not the drone but how it is utilized and how the authorities handle, analyze, and react to the data collected to deter or control crime (Balcerzak & Sieradzka, 2022). To address these concerns, this Research concentrates on determining legal and moral issues with the police’s usage of drones and addressing these considerations. This paper will employ the meta-analytical research approach, where information from the existing literature is analyzed to develop significant conclusions about the effects of using drones.
As Balcerzak and Sieradzka (2022) report, it is reasonable for lawmakers to be concerned about the spread of unmanned aircraft (also known as “drones”). As a result of these worries, some have advocated for laws that would make nearly all drone uses illegal without a government warrant. Today, eleven states require a warrant before the government can use a drone for law enforcement purposes, and the remaining two states have no laws regulating the use of drones by law enforcement. It is the result of persistent lobbying by privacy supporters. Privacy campaigns typically make a convincing case about the dangers of pervasive surveillance, but laws are rarely drafted to prevent the harm that privacy advocates fear. All of the recent legislation is focused on drones themselves rather than the harm they cause (pervasive surveillance). Consequences of any technological fixation include outlawing the use of drones for relatively harmless purposes like recording accident and crime scenes or keeping tabs on pollution and other environmental hazards while allowing the use of highly sophisticated, all-encompassing surveillance technologies from crewed aircraft.
Significance of the Research
There has been a scant study of police and law department use of drones, despite their growing prevalence. According to some people, drones are useful in effecting discipline within a community or amongst offenders since they offer complete and detailed information about the law perpetrators. Some worry that drones will strain already tense relations between police and the public, who keep worrying about their privacy. The use of drones is controversial because they intrude on the privacy of the public, leave alone trespassing on personal property, and are considered a severe form of surveillance in the process of gathering information in the name of enforcing law and order. “Drones are a potentially ‘lethal’ tool to the public’s privacy so many privacy advocates contend have warned against their use without a warrant,” (Gkougkoudis, Pissanidis & Demertzis, 2022. pp. 143-163).
Moreover, it is preferable to use other methods to enforce the law and bring the offenders to justice. Some academics may justify drones because of the fear they inspire, but their indiscriminate use is unjust regarding the public’s privacy (Politowicz et al., 2023). Since the outcome of this question can shed light on whether or not police should continue to use drones, it is of the utmost importance.
Goals of the Research
This study aims to bring attention to the police department’s continued reliance on drones despite ongoing efforts to curtail their use.
The study’s significance also stems from the fact that it will shed light on how law enforcement uses cutting-edge technology in its quest for justice.
This Research is also essential because it would examine how Drones affect people’s privacy. Possible outcomes include loss of personal respect in case of leakages of some intimate footage that might not have leaked in case the drones were unavailable.
To better understand how people’s attitudes toward UASs have evolved concerning their intended role, Legere (2019) conducted a meta-analysis of existing studies.
It was decided that a new survey was not required for this inquiry as there was already an abundance of data from previous polls. Instead, information was gleaned from archives to confirm or refute hypotheses and set the stage for the problems. A meta-analysis, or comprehensive review, is essential for this paper. In order to increase statistical power and provide conclusive answers to research questions, a meta-analysis compiles and analyzes quantitative and qualitative data from multiple previous studies. With Legere’s (2019) research, this paper compiles surveys conducted at varying times and covers topics like public and commercial UAS operations and public acceptance. The quantitative data from the studies will help answer fundamental questions about the likelihood of winning over a large audience for the mission. A meta-analysis will help characterize the connection between UAS’s intended mission and public acceptance, even if this was not the primary goal of the original studies.
In order to gauge the level of public and corporate interest in UAS, researchers compiled data from various digital archives. The Embry-Riddle team gathered their information from a wide range of print and digital sources available in the university’s Hunt Library. There are numerous books and articles on the topic, and even more, can be found on the internet. However, this review could only include surveys and studies conducted within the last decade. Unfortunately, no new information is produced by meta-analyses because they can only be performed on studies that have already been published. No proposal has been submitted to an IRB, no sampling plan has been developed, and no survey instrument has been made.
Assumptions are made in this proposal about the public’s reaction to UAS, such as the importance of their intended mission (public use versus commercial use). The findings indicate that public and commercial spaces are the most frequent settings. Data from the past was analyzed using a chi-square test of independence (95% confidence interval) in the Stat Crawler report (Legere, 2019). The chi-square test is a sum-of-squares test that compares observed values to the expected values. The null hypothesis is rejected if and only if the calculated chi-square value is larger than the critical value. Each test had only a single DF, so a chi-squared value of 3.84 was required for any interpretation. We used a chi-square test of independence to determine whether or not there was a significant relationship between the project’s stated goal and the level of support it received from the general public using the data in the table below.
|Public Acceptability||Commercial||Public Use||Number of Survey Responses||X^2|
Chi-square test results (Legere, 2019)
Study Limitations and Delimitations
While most prior Research on UAS public acceptance has distinguished between what constitutes an sUAS and a UAS, this study does not make that distinction. By having participants define “drone” in their own terms, Politowicz et al. (2023) drew attention to this limitation. “The study has the same limitations as others have because of the public’s lack of consensus on what constitutes a ‘drone,’ ‘sUAS,’ (small unmanned aerial system),” they added. If military UAS like the MQ-1 Predator and MQ-9 Reaper were restricted, public opinion might shift in favor of sUAS.
“This study focuses on the American public’s perception of UAS rather than international attitudes. Model aircraft are not allowed to be used in Research due to the restrictions placed on them by 14CFR 1.1 Part 107 and Public Law 112-95. Lastly, only data from surveys conducted within the last decade were used,” (Politowicz et al., 2023. P. 2525).
Discussion of Drones in Law Enforcement Agencies (Basing on the Research, Literature Review and the Goals of the Study)
History and Use of Drone Technology in Law Enforcement
During World War I, scientists from the United Kingdom and the United States created the first fully autonomous machine (Afxentiou, 2018). These “sky planes” developed from the same mental model. All three terms—”drones,” “unmanned aerial vehicles,” and “remotely piloted aircraft”—refer to the same thing. Initially developed for target practice, drones have since found additional applications in fields like photography and surveillance. The military first used drones in the 1960s, and since then, they have become increasingly important. U.S. Air Force drones are currently used primarily for reconnaissance and surveillance missions. According to Watney (2022), drones are now routinely used in military operations in advanced nations like the United Kingdom and China. The military, the mining industry, the agricultural sector, and many other sectors are actively developing drones. Businesses and governments buy them from the market, while enthusiasts often create their own. Some drones are powered solely by batteries, while others use electric motors to get into the air. Single-rotor and multi-rotor drones like tri-copters, hexacopters, quad-copters, and octocopters make up most of the drone population (Afxentiou, 2018). Drones that cannot take off and land vertically, like those with fixed wings, fall into the second category.
Drone evidence collection is a controversial topic in the criminal justice system. Drones, according to some, can assist police in solving crimes and locating criminals. The use of drones is seen by many as an unwanted intrusion into personal space. When police use drones in investigations, several potential legal issues can arise. A court order may be necessary before anyone can use a drone for surveillance purposes. The United States Fourth Amendment and other privacy laws may apply to them. If you use a drone to record someone without their permission or knowledge, you could be breaking the law.
The United States use of unmanned aerial vehicles in Iraq and Afghanistan has recently drawn criticism. Both supporters and detractors of drone use can be found in these nations. One strong case for using drones is that they can eliminate terrorist threats without putting soldiers in danger. Drones can quietly survey large areas, zero in on their targets, and then depart without harming any innocent bystanders (Watney, 2022). Countless individuals hold firm beliefs on either side of the ongoing drone debate. Residents of areas with numerous military bases may have a heightened sense of insecurity, which could inspire more terrorist acts, and so goes the thinking. When drones are used for surveillance rather than counterterrorism, the likelihood of human rights violations increases.
Role of Public Safety Manager
There are several options available to people today for ensuring their personal safety. This aid is typically provided by municipal, state, or federal governments to their respective citizens. Professionals in the field of public safety management are tasked with ensuring that all of these procedures are effective and in line with all applicable laws. Managing public safety entails directing and coordinating measures to protect the general populace. Those looking for work in the public sector or the healthcare industry may find opportunities. In order to effectively manage these services, experts in strategic planning, preparedness strategies, inter-agency coordination, and fiscal management are required.
In 2015, the Office of Inspector General for the United States Department of the Interior used drones to investigate allegations of wrongdoing within the National Park Service (Afxentiou, 2018: Watney, 2022). Staff misconduct, such as the theft of park materials, was suspected in some areas, prompting the use of drones to film and take photographs. Several employees were terminated after a favorable investigation concluded. This inquiry exemplifies how drones will revolutionize future police work and forensics. Drones can collect evidence when it is too risky or impossible to do so manually (such as through aerial photography). The Office of the Inspector General conducted a sensitive investigation with the help of drone technology without endangering any of its agents.
Several experts in the field of public safety management have observed that drones are becoming increasingly significant in the investigation and analysis of terrorist attacks because of the fresh perspective and expanded context they offer. Drones equipped with a variety of surveillance and reconnaissance tools can help in the search for criminals and the discovery of potential terrorist hideouts (Agarwal, Sharma, & Matta, 2022). The data collected by drones could be beneficial in the fight against terrorism. Drones can be of great assistance to law enforcement agencies during investigations of terrorist activities, and they should be used extensively.
There are legitimate worries that drones could be used for illegal purposes like spying on innocent civilians or aiding terrorist plots, despite the fact that the vast majority of drone use is legal and helpful in law enforcement investigations (Afxentiou, 2018). Police investigations are now much more efficient thanks to the use of drones, which has led to the successful conclusion of several high-profile cases. In all likelihood, this technology will serve as a deterrent to wrongdoing. In addition, drones have helped save lives by alerting authorities to dangerous locales. Their effectiveness and precision save time and money for organizations in the public and private sectors.
Implications to Law Enforcement Organizations and Stake Holders
In this case, the stakeholders are the privacy advocates who are concerned about the privacy of the public. These individuals are in to make sure to keep the public out of harm’s way. Some worry that the government will abuse the ease and low cost of using drones to conduct constant surveillance of its citizens. Despite the fact that drones can help departments save money, the most expensive models are out of reach for most organizations (oftentimes, these drones are small remote-controlled helicopters or airplanes, capable of a flight time of less than one hour) (Agarwal, Sharma, & Matta, 2022). As an added bonus, the surveillance equipment that can be mounted on these drones is much less invasive than that which can be mounted on manned aircraft. In addition, the term “unmanned aircraft” is misleading because there are no systems currently available to law enforcement that can carry out fully autonomous operations. Although the cost of a drone system is lower than that of a manned aerial surveillance platform, the need for a human pilot means that the total system cost remains the same.
However, privacy advocates have only called for warrants to be necessary before law enforcement can use drones to counteract surveillance (Agarwal, Sharma, & Matta, 2022). In spite of the fact that police use of drones is often helpful and rarely controversial, this requirement could effectively end the use of drones by law enforcement. Therefore, stakeholders like privacy advocates and citizen interest groups agree that lawmakers should adopt a property rights stance with regard to aerial surveillance. According to Agarwal, Sharma, and Matta (2022), the use of this tactic allows landowners to restrict access to the airspace above their property from the ground up to a height of 350 feet. Most of the issues that can arise in the public and private sectors when using drones could be avoided if this approach were adopted.
In addition, Hartley, Henderson, and Jackson (2022. P. 67) indicate that “Lawmakers must craft precise, duration-based surveillance legislation to cap the total amount of time the state can keep tabs on an individual. “They also add that “Persistent surveillance risks can be committed by both manned and unmanned aircraft, so legislation is needed to address this issue.”
Likewise, policymakers should institute data retention practices that make it more difficult to access data gathered via aerial surveillance, both in terms of the level of suspicion required and the extent to which the data is protected from being accessed in violation of existing legal norms. Data storage must be deleted per law after a certain period of time has elapsed. Lawmakers should enact transparency and oversight measures that mandate the regular publication of data on the government’s use of aerial surveillance technologies (both manned and unmanned) (Agarwal, Sharma, & Matta, 2022). Technology advancements like geofencing and auto-redaction make drone-based aerial surveillance potentially more privacy-friendly than human-based surveillance, which lawmakers should consider.
Privacy, Legal and Ethical Concerns of Using Drones in Law Enforcement
In the year 2020, George Floyd led the largest wave of protests in the United States against police brutality since the 1960s, and they were the most watched protests in the country’s history. Since citizens have a right to protest peacefully and have free speech, police monitoring of the Black Lives Matter (BLM) protest raised many legal and ethical questions. The justification for the police using social media analytics, body cameras, and drones to monitor the protests and protesters has been called into question (Watney, 2022). With the public’s safety at stake, authorities have no choice but to employ surveillance technology in their pursuit of catching criminals and putting an end to violence. The state’s capacity to safeguard its own citizens is one definition of national security. To safeguard free speech, privacy (including data protection), and national security, however, we must first address the question of how to keep the state from becoming too powerful and dominant.
The FAA, or United States Federal Aviation Administration, is in charge of regulating the airspace over the United States to ensure the safety of all aircraft, including drones, in the air (Police Executive Research Forum, 2020). Adding firearms or other weapons to drones is also currently against the rules set forth by the FAA, and this includes law enforcement. Although several states have outright banned any kind of drone weaponization, North Dakota was the first in 2015 to pass a law in favor of drones equipped with non-lethal weapons.
Aviation laws and regulations govern drones and specify things like how they must be built, whether or not they must be registered, and what information can and cannot be gathered from them. The question is whether the existing aviation laws and regulations should be supplemented by a purpose-specific act regulating the use of drones by law enforcement. Concerns such as whether or not police need the warrant to use drones, the protection of private information, the legality of using drones armed with weapons, and the admissibility of evidence gathered by drones in court would all be addressed by this proposed legislation. American state legislatures often enact laws with narrow aims in mind. Perhaps the United States government as a whole will decide to standardize the use of drones for law enforcement. New rules regarding drones in France will go into effect in 2024. Such targeted legislation has the potential to improve compliance with the law by bolstering concepts like legal certainty, openness, and duty.
Evidence from the United States demonstrates that public opinion regarding UAS varies depending on the specifics of the mission at hand. If you want to characterize and identify the nature of the connection between the intended mission of UAS and public acceptance, you’ll need more than just quantitative studies. A thorough examination of how drones can aid in crime prevention, detection, and investigation is provided in the study’s discussion section. Discuss the ethical and legal concerns raised by the widespread use of police drones and compare and contrast the approaches taken by different countries. There are moral and legal quandaries involved in preventing police brutality against the public. Protective measures “would allow us to incorporate this new technology and separate the benefits from the dangers it presents,” Watney (2022. P. 489) writes of domestic drone policing. The public’s faith in the police department’s drone program can be restored by instituting stringent protocols for accountability and transparency. It is crucial that law enforcement have access to cutting-edge technology in a world where criminals can use it to commit crimes. Unpiloted aircraft systems or any other vehicle that doesn’t need a human pilot.
Afxentiou, A. (2018). History of drones: moral (e) bombing and state terrorism. Critical
Agarwal, P., Sharma, S., & Matta, P. (2022). Big Data Technologies in UAV’s Traffic Management System: Importance, Benefits, Challenges, and Applications. Autonomous Vehicles Volume 1: Using Machine Intelligence, pp. 181-201
Balcerzak, T., & Sieradzka, M. (2022). Polish Criminal Liability of the UAV Operator in Connection with the Unauthorized Flight in Operations Area of Fire Services in the Context of the Possibility of the U-Space Using. Journal of Intelligent & Robotic Systems, 106(1), 25.
Gkougkoudis, G., Pissanidis, D., & Demertzis, K. (2022). Intelligence-Led Policing and the New Technologies Adopted by the Hellenic Police. Digital, 2(2),p. 143-163.
Hartley, R. J. A. L., Henderson, I. L., & Jackson, C. L. (2022). BVLOS Unmanned Aircraft Operations in Forest Environments. Drones, 6(7), p. 167.
Legere, M. (2019). Meta-Analysis of Public Acceptance of Unmanned Aircraft Meta-Analysis of Public Acceptance of Unmanned Aircraft Systems in the United States Systems in the United States. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/232602649.pdf
Maghazei, O., Lewis, M. A., & Netland, T. H. (2022). Emerging technologies and the use case: A multi‐year study of drone adoption. Journal of Operations Management, 68(6-7), pp. 560–591.
Police Executive Research Forum, (2020). View of Ethical and Legal Aspects Pertaining to law Enforcement use of Drones. (n.d.). Papers.academic-Conferences.org. https://papers.academic-conferences.org/index.php/iccws/article/view/27/46
Politowicz, M. S., Chancey, E. T., Buck, B. K., Unverricht, J., & Petty, B. J. (2023). MPATH (Measuring Performance for Autonomy Teaming with Humans) Ground Control Station: Design Approach and Initial Usability Results. In AIAA SciTech 2023 Forum (p. 2525). Studies on Terrorism, 11(2), 301-320.
Watney, M. (2022, March). Ethical and Legal Aspects Pertaining to law Enforcement use of Drones. In International Conference on Cyber Warfare and Security (Vol. 17, No. 1, pp. 358-365).
Case Study On Walmart’s Unethical Practices Sample Paper
Walmart has been at the forefront of the retail industry for decades, making it one of the best stores in the world. Walmart is well-known for its competitive pricing, extensive inventory, and devoted service staff. Many, however, feel that Walmart’s business practices are unethical and have voiced their concerns about the company’s treatment of its supplier and employee partners. Using real-world ethical scenarios involving Walmart’s supply chain and workforce as case studies, this research will examine if and to what extent Walmart’s business practices are seen as unethical by its various stakeholder groups. This case study will examine how Walmart’s overarching business tenets have informed the company’s H.R. practices and policies. Then the case will read two laws that employees and the U.S. government have accused Walmart of breaking the rules and regulations. Finally, it shall offer recommendations for Walmart’s H.R. team to boost morale and confidence in the company’s business and H.R. strategies among workers.
Walmart’s business is unethical
Walmart’s business model establishes the belief that low prices can attract customers and increase profits. Therefore, the company has to find ways to cut costs, often by squeezing suppliers and employees (Ferrell et al., 2021). Walmart demanded unrealistic prices from suppliers, pushing them to the brink of bankruptcy in order to maximize profits. Furthermore, the company needs to improve its employment practices, such as low wages and inadequate benefits (Courtemanche et al., 2021). These practices have resulted in Walmart being unethical in the business world.
Despite these criticisms, Walmart has made efforts to be more ethical in its practices. For example, the company has implemented a Supplier Code of Conduct, which sets out expectations for suppliers regarding labour and human rights, environmental protection, and product safety and quality. This code was developed in conjunction with the International Labor Organization (ILO) and other industry partners and monitored by a third-party firm (Ferrell et al., 2021). Additionally, Walmart has increased wages and offered additional benefits to employees, such as health care and paid leave. These measures demonstrate a commitment to ethical practices and show that the company is willing to make changes to improve its reputation.
Walmart’s business model, which encourages aggressive cost-cutting at any cost, may be partially to blame for the retailer’s reputation for unethical behaviour among its partners in the supply chain and employees. This reputation stems from the fact that Walmart has a culture that rewards and rewards unethical behaviour (Alsharari, 2021). The company has increased the amount of money it invests in training its staff, improved the range of perks it gives, and formed a Supplier Code of Conduct to respond to the issues brought up (Volpe et al., 2022). These initiatives illustrate Walmart’s dedication to ethically conducting business as well as the corporation’s willingness to evolve in order to enhance the reputation of the company.
Significant effects that Walmart’s business philosophy
The company has come under intense scrutiny over the years due to its controversial business practices, labour policies and perceived exploitation of workers. Walmart is known for its low prices but has also been accused of paying low wages and providing inadequate employee benefits (Alsharari, 2021). Walmart’s business philosophy is centred on maintaining a low-cost structure and maximizing profits. First, the company has a strict cost-control strategy, which has resulted in the company’s ability to offer the lowest prices in the industry. This cost-cutting strategy has also extended to its labour practices. Walmart has sought to reduce labour costs by minimizing wages and benefits and increasing the use of part-time and temporary workers (Volpe et al., 2022). The company has also been accused of mistreating its employees and violating labour laws.
Another significant effect of Walmart’s business philosophy on its human resource practices and policies is its emphasis on efficiency and productivity. Walmart has a highly developed system of monitoring and measuring employee performance. The company has implemented sophisticated software systems that track employee performance and facilitate identifying and addressing any performance issue (Ferrell et al., 2021)s. This system has also ensured that employees work efficiently and meet productivity targets.
Walmart’s business philosophy has significantly affected its approach to employee relations. The company has traditionally been viewed as having an adversarial relationship with its employees. Walmart has sought to minimize labour costs by minimizing wages and benefits and discouraging employee participation in labour unions (Johnson, 2018). The company has also been accused of retaliating against employees who have attempted to organize or join unions. However, these practices have also been criticized as exploitative, resulting in the company’s adversarial relationship with its employees.
Legal mandates Walmart violated
Walmart is a large multinational retail corporation subject to many legal mandates. In recent years, Walmart has been accused of violating numerous labour laws, regulations, and other legal mandates, which can have severe repercussions for the company (Ferrell et al., 2021). Walmart has been accused of violating the Fair Labor Standards Act designed to protect workers and ensure they are paid appropriately for their work. Walmart has been accused of violating the FLSA by failing to pay its employees for all hours worked. Specifically, Walmart has been accused of failing to pay employees for pre-shift and post-shift work, such as attending mandatory meetings and sorting merchandise. Walmart has also been accused of not paying employees for overtime hours or the time they spent travelling between stores (Courtemanche et al., 2021). These violations of the FLSA can lead to significant financial losses for Walmart, as the company may be required to provide back pay to affected employees.
Another legal mandate that Walmart has been accused of violating is the Occupational Safety and Health Act. This law is designed to provide safe and healthy working conditions for employees. Walmart has been accused of violating OSHA standards by failing to provide adequate ways and alternatives of safety measures for the workers (Alsharari, 2021). Walmart has also been accused of failing to address unsafe working conditions, such as damaged floors and equipment, which can lead to injuries and illnesses. These violations can result in costly fines for Walmart and put employees at risk of harm. These violations can have severe repercussions for the company, including financial losses and fines (Johnson, 2018). Therefore, Walmart must comply with all applicable legal mandates to protect its employees and ensure its compliance with the law.
Ethical decision-making process
The company has successfully achieved its goal of providing customers with quality products at low prices while maintaining its commitment to ethical decision-making. The company accomplished its mission of meeting the demands of its clientele by delivering high-quality goods at competitive costs, all while upholding its commitment to acting ethically in all dealings (Volpe et al., 2022). In order to accomplish this goal, Walmart has built a comprehensive ethical decision-making framework that consists of three fundamental components. Risk management constitutes the first component of Walmart’s ethical business decision strategy (Ferrell et al., 2021). Walmart has utilized various risk management tactics, including keeping an extensive compliance program, doing routine internal audits, and actively engaging in proactive stakeholder engagement.
The rewards administration is the second component of Walmart’s framework for making ethical decisions. Setting and keeping track of the proper awards for employees and other stakeholders is an essential part of reward management (Johnson, 2018). Walmart has introduced many reward programs, such as incentive plans, performance-based compensation, and employee recognition initiatives. These incentive and reward programs aim to ensure that workers are motivated and encouraged to behave in a manner that is consistent with company values (Ferrell et al., 2021). Consequently, Walmart has fulfilled its mission of supplying customers with high-quality goods at low rates while still upholding its commitment to ethically making decisions.
Walmart has also implemented an ethical decision-making process that prioritizes the requirements of many stakeholders. This approach was developed to ensure that decisions are made that are both in the best interests of the firm and those who have a stake in the company while also taking into account any potential risks or rewards that may be involved with the decision. The framework for making ethical judgments that Walmart uses is effective in that it can strike a healthy balance between the potential for risks and rewards and guarantee that decisions will be in the corporation’s and its stakeholders’ best interests. The framework offers an all-encompassing method for recognizing and evaluating potential risks, compensating employees and other stakeholders, and ensuring that choices are made that are in the organization’s and its stakeholders’ best interests.
Recommend two actions
The company is the world’s largest retailer, and it has a large number of employees in its workforce. Walmart needs to juggle risks and rewards for its employees to ensure their satisfaction and increase motivation (Courtemanche et al., 2021). As such, the human resources department of Walmart needs to consider two actions. The first action should be the implementation of understandable working conditions and hours. Therefore, allowing workers to adjust their work schedules to meet their personal needs. It could be in the form of teleworking, part-time working, or job sharing. Therefore, give employees the freedom to balance their work and personal lives and make their own decisions about managing their time (Ferrell et al., 2021). Hence, it also gives employees a sense of autonomy, which is essential to employee satisfaction.
The second action implemented was increasing the visibility of employee rewards and recognition. The employees are responsible for being informed about the benefits and acknowledgement they are eligible for due to their hard work and dedication (Johnson, 2018). It can be accomplished through various means of communication, including newsletters, emails, or intranet sites. Employees will be motivated to perform to the best of their abilities due to this opportunity to view the kinds of rewards available to them (Courtemanche et al., 2021). In addition to this, it will assist in the development of a sense of fairness and equity among employees, both of which are critical components in the process of preserving a healthy environment in the workplace.
Lastly, the human resources department of Walmart should introduce flexible working hours and boost the visibility of employee awards and recognition in order to improve the viewpoints of Walmart’s employees regarding the business and human resources policies of Walmart. Both activities will instil a sense of autonomy and fairness in the employees, inspiring them to perform to the best of their abilities (Courtemanche et al., 2021). In the long run, this will result in increased employee satisfaction and more productive staff. These include the use of part-time and temporary workers, the use of independent contractors, and the use of standardized pay and benefits packages (Volpe et al., 2022). These practices have been widely criticized for their low wages, lack of job security, and lack of job benefits.
In conclusion, Walmart’s business philosophy and human resources practices have significantly impacted its stakeholders. The company has been accused of violating legal mandates, and its ethical decision-making framework has been inefficient. However, Walmart’s human resources department can take action to improve the perception of its policies. It can ensure that workers are given their legal rights, such as minimum wage, overtime pay, and protection from discrimination, and establish clear policies and procedures that employees can use to report unethical behaviour. Additionally, it can continue to focus on creating a safe and diverse workplace where employees can thrive and contribute to the company’s success. With these actions, Walmart can ensure that its stakeholders have a favourable view of the company and its policies.
Alsharari, N. M. (2021). Management accounting practices and e-business model in the U.S. Walmart Corporation. Accounting and Finance Innovations, p. 3.v
Courtemanche, C., & Carden, A. (2021). Is it supersizing supercenters? The impact of Walmart Supercenters on body mass index and obesity. Journal of Urban Economics, 69(2), 165-181.
Ferrell, O. C., & Fraedrich, J. (2021). Business ethics: Ethical decision making and cases. Cengage learning.
Johnson, S. M. (2018). Walmart’s strategy and ethical decision-making framework. Journal of Business Ethics, 120(1), 45–60.
Volpe, R., & Boland, M. A. (2022). The Economic Impacts of Walmart Supercenters. Annual Review of Resource Economics, 14, 43-62. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-resource-111820-032827