law, ethics & csr exam

8/10/2019 Law, Ethics & CSR Exam

1/7

Offer:-

An offer is a statement of the terms which the client (the offeror) is prepared to be

contractually bound and;

The offer must be complete must be complete, specific and capable of being accepted. It must

include the fundamental terms of the agreement with the intention that no further negotiations

are to take place and;

Client offer contractor the work and therefore the contractor must carry out the work under

the clients terms and conditions. It is possible to make a conditional offer.

The effect of this is that an offer cannot be accepted if the condition has not been satisfied.

For example the client requires the contractor to have a specific tool or machine before an

offer can be made.

The offer only comes into existence after the client reviews the tenders handed in by the

contractors and accept the offer or;

An offer on the other hand is when the client offers the job to one contractor without

advertising the job or having contractors to submit in the tender.

Invitation to Treat:-

An invitation to treat is different to an offer as it only invites the party to make an offer and it

is not intended to be binding and;

The contractors are invited to bid on the job, by calculating the total work cost and to have the

tenders submitted in a specified time and;

The main difference between this situation and an auction is that person submitted the tender,

does so in ignorance of others bids because the final decision is up to the client, and;

Making an invitation to treat, rather than an offer, protects the client from finding him/her self

agreed into a contract he/she cannot fulfill. Instead the client can refuse the contractors offer

for many different reasons and; This can be very important protection for the client making the offer if the advertisement for

the job offers at long distance: for example, through the internet or newspaper. Always ensure

that any website, advertisement etc make it clear that it is only an invitation to treat, not an

offer and;

An invitation to treat is when a client invites contractors to make him/her an offer. For

example, when the client advertises a job on internet or newspaper, it is usually an invitation

to treat rather than an offer.


2/7

A Contract of service vs A contract for services

The law makes a distinction between a contract of service and a contract for service.

Basically, a contract of service applies to an employee-employer relationship, while a contract

for service applies in the case of an independent sub-contractor.

A contract of service is an agreement where one person agrees to employ another as an

employee and the other agrees to serve his employer as an employee. Under a contract of

service, the employer must contribute to CPF and provide relevant statutory benefits such as

annual leave, sick leave etc for his employees.

A contract for services is an agreement where a person is engaged as an independent

contractor, such as a self-employed person or vendor engaged for a fee to carry out an

assignment or a project for the company. Under such a work arrangement, there is no

employer-employee relationship, and the employee is not covered by the Employment Act.

Of service or For services

Of For

Employer-Employee relationship Employer-Independent Contractor

relationship

Usually a continuous relationship A relationship organized around the

completion of a once-off piece of work

A duty of care owed to employees, as the

employer

A duty of care, arising from occupiers

liability

The employer is generally liable for the

vicarious acts of employees

The employer is generally not liable for the

vicarious acts of independent contractorsProtective legislation applies to contract In general, protective legislation does not

apply

Wages/Salary payment method Various methods of payment, including lump

sum per job

Subject of contract is to carry on continuous

work

Subject of contract is once-off job


3/7

Ethics From Islamic Perspective

Ethics definition is as the set of moral principles that refers to the rightness or wrongness of

the decisions and behaviors of individuals and the organization of which they a part.

In general, it can be defined as the system of rules governing the ordering of values. It is a

normative field because it prescribes what one should do or abstain from doing.

Within an Islamic context, the term most closely related to ethics in Quran is khuluq.

The Prophets general advice to all people was:

What is lawful is clear and what is unlawful is clear, but between them are certain doubtful

things which many people do not recognize. He who guards against the doubtful things keeps

his religions and his honor blameless, but he who falls into doubtful things falls into what is

unlawful, just as a shepherd who pastures his flocks around a sanctuary will soon pasture

them in it. Every king has a sanctuary, and Gods sanctuary is the things he had declared

unlawful (Al-Bukhari)

We are as Muslim: we have to remain ethical standards, not only in business but also

in all aspects of life. Both business and ethics are interrelated. There is a reference to

this point in the Quran: For you in the Messenger of Allah is a fine example to follow

(Al-Azhab 33:21)

Key Parameters of the Islamic Ethical System

Action and decisions are judged to be ethical depending on the intention of the

individual. Allah is the Omniscient and knows our intention completely & perfectly.

Good intentions followed by good actions are considered as act of worship. Halal(good) intention does not make haram (bad) actions halal.

Good Ethics in Quran

The Quran uses many terms to describe the concepts of goodness or good behaviour:

- Khayr (goodness);

- Birr (righteousness);

- Qist (equity);

- adl (equilibrium & justice);

-Haqq (truth & right);

- Maaruf (good and right doing);

- Taqwa (piety).

Islam uses an open system approach to ethics, not a closed, selforiented system. Egoism

has no place in Islam.

Islam encourages humankind to experience active participation in this life. By behaving

ethically, Muslims prove their worth to Allah.

The Islamic ethical system is part of the Islamic view of life & therefore complete.

There is internal consistency, adl, equilibrium, within an individuals codeof conduct


4/7


5/7

Law Is Sufficient To Establish The Moral Standard In The World of Business

The concept of business ethics ranges from respects of the obligatory law, to attention to

mutually shared ethical rules, to the collective well-being, and as far as philanthropy. Due to

such heterogeneity of interpretations, it proves useful to attempt to define the concept of

moral problems by establishing their content & limits.

Such a matter proves to be of primary importance; first , to be able to establish which

situation have underlying questions of ethical implication; second, to be able to evaluate the

moral conduct of the company.

The enterprise finds itself therefore in the position of conflict, enabling it to choose between

different modes of conduct, some legitimate (law) , others moral (power). Think about a

chemical enterprise, for which the law establishes certain quantities of polluting

substancesemitted into the environment.

To abstract from what the normal prescribed, such quantities of pollutant result to be toxic

for the people living extremely near the production factory. In his framework, the possible

operative choices of the enterprise can be contained within 2 types of conduct; respect the

law, damaging however the members of the community; respect the moral constraint of

power, modifying their own productive process, protecting the community.

Until now the law has been defined as the minimal obligatory constraint of the enterprise (in

addition to the minimal socio-ethical level) and power as the maximum moral constraint

indicating implicitly an order between the two measures.

It is by fact, stated that the nascent obligation from the norms decidedly less diffuse and

profound than that derived from power. Such a first intuitive relationship permits the

definitions of the space in which conflicts arise between law and the morality; the law

evaluates as sufficient conducts that ethics considered inadequate, requiring of it a different

profile.

In practice, this scenario happens less frequently, because the law would have to ask of the

enterprise a level of care and respect towards third parties which is higher than that morally

impose by its own power.

Considering that law and power can interact according to different relationship, an ethical

problem is not necessary present.


6/7

Every Company or Corporation Is Morally Responsible To The Society As a Whole

The attention given to the studies of business ethics over the last several decades has served toreinforce the conviction that business corporation have social responsibility that requires themto use some of their resources to address needs in their communities. These resources may becash, or physical property or even the time and energy of their employees. Ordinarily, the needs

addressed are outside the scope of the normal operations of the company. As a result, a

corporation made significant contribution to the arts or to social service organizations. In doingthis, advocates argue, they are merely being good corporate citizens and giving something backto the society. We may call this the strong corporate social responsibility.

In 1970, Friedman wrote an article for the New York Times Magazines in which he argued thatbusiness corporation best serve their societies when they increase their profitability.Furthermore, he said, executive of business corporations had no warrant to use the assets of thecompany for charitable purpose. To do so would constitute, in his judgment, an illicit tax on hisstakeholders since it would be a use of their money for public purposes that was neitherlawfully required nor consensual. This article has probably become the most commonly

reprinted in the business ethics literature (though it is normally offered as an example of wrong-headed responsibility). Not surprisingly, Friedman has been misunderstood or misinterpreted to

say that businesses need not be concerned about ethics in their pursuit of profit.

Over the last decade or two, as some version of the strong view has become the commonopinion in business schools and executive suites, thinking about the nature of the businesscorporation and its relationship to the community has also changed. Quite often the moralquality of a company has been evaluated in terms of its commitment to social responsibility. Inpractice, however, this has created at least two kinds of problems, which on occasion have beenserious and which, in any event, should provoke us to reconsider the wisdom and soundness ofthe corporate social responsibility.

The first kind of problem is that the specific nature of corporate contribution sometimesbecomes an obstacle to the successful conduct of business. For example, several companies

have received unwelcome publicity and been the largest of customer outrage because of theirsupport for or opposition to Planned Parenthood. Some years ago, the Target Corporation(which famously donates5 percent of its taxable income each year to arts and serviceorganizations) came under criticism for its modest support of a Planned Parenthood programunrelated to abortion services.

When it decided to drop its support on the ground that it was unnecessarily controversial, it thenwas threatened with boycotts from customers and investor who supported abortion rights. Aftera few weeks, the company reinstated its small grant to Finland to Planned Parenthood but thenof course, it was threatened with boycotts by pro-life customers.

Nevertheless, Business Corporation are at liberty to make whatever donations they wish to

address whatever needs they choose. The key, of course, is the difference between obligationsand freedom. What is not required may still be permitted. In the case of business corporations,donations may be made when doing so will not undermine the legitimate operations of thebusiness, when employees and customers will not be harmed and with shareholders consent.

Corporate philanthropy has accomplished a great deal of good. No doubt it should be continuevigorously but at the expense of a company more fundamental and important corporate socialresponsibilities to create wealth, to provide goods jobs, and to offer products and services thatserve genuine human needs.


7/7

Employee Blow The Whistle

The firm through its products or policy will do serious and considerable harm to the public,whether in the person of the user of its product, an innocent bystander or the general public.

Once an employee identifies a serious threat to the user of a product or to the general public, he

or she should report it to his or her immediate superior and make his or her moral concern

known. Unless he or she does so, the act of Whistle blowing is not justifiable.

If ones immediate superior does nothing effective about the concern or complaint, the

employee should exhaust the internal procedures and possibilities within the firm. This usually

will involve taking the matter up the managerial ladder, and if necessary and possible to the

board of directors.

Whistleblower must have accessible documented evidence that would convince a reasonable,

impartial observer that ones view of the situation is correct, and that the companys product or

practice possesses a serious and likely danger to the public or to the user of the product.

The employee must have good reason to believe that by going public the necessary changes will

be brought about. The chance of being successful must be worth the risks one takes and danger

to which one is exposed.

In fact, a loyal friend is not only someone who sticks by you in times of trouble but someone

who tries to help you avoid trouble.

This may imply to an employee that he or she is most loyal when trying to prevent something

that could lead to harm for customer, shareholders or the general public. If there is no proper

response internally, or if by the nature of the case, it is not possible to find an internal remedy,

then it would seem ethically correct to blow the whistle.

In fact sometimes, there can be a duty to do so. It would be obligatory for an employee to blow

the whistle when the level of harm to others is serious, and the employee has clear evidence of

the unethical practice that has led to it. This could, for example be in terms of products safety or

severe financial hardship for others.

In such case, before an obligation to go public could be imposed, it would require judgment that

there was no simpler solution.

Considerations Make sure the situation is serious enough to warrant going in superiors or going public.

Examine your motives. Is it in the public interest or for revenge?

Be sure the exact nature of the problem and to whom it should be reported.

Sticks to the facts. Avoid personalizing the issue.

Check to see the amount of protection provided for whistleblower.

Consult a lawyer

law, ethics & csr exam

Documents