The Travel Expense Billing Controversy Essay Example for Free

The Travel Expense Billing Controversy attemptNeal A. Roberts, an employee of PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) found out that his employer was earning millions of dollars a year by way of a billing method that he thought was doubtful. PwC had been collecting large rebates on skyway tickets and other travel expenses being charged as expenses to clients of the house. These rebates were non being returned to the firms clients in the form of savings, but the firm was keeping these rebates for it.This was working, because the firm would bill the clients for the full price of airline tickets and other travel-related expense, but privately, the firm negotiated discounts and rebates that they then got at the complete of the year based upon total amounts spent. The clients did not know anything of the back-end discounts and rebates the firm was getting therefore, they were being charged much than the firms true out-of-pocket expenses for the items. In October 2001, the firm fin eithery stopped taking airline rebates completely.The social club started structuring all discounts as front-end price reductions that would be passed on to the clients. In the professional environment, there be two main argonas in which honourable behavior is required. The first point concerns the behavior of the employee at work, in dealing with colleagues, with supervisors and subordinates and as well with customers, the second point concerns the behavior of the company itself against its customers, its employees and all others who may are refer from company. Also you have to distinguish between descriptive and normative ethics. Descriptive ethics is concerned with describing, characterizing, and perusal the morality of a people, an organization, a culture, or a society. It focuses on what is the deeming set of bonnie standards in the craft community, specific organizations, or on the part of specific managers. Normative ethics is concerned with planning and justifying a co herent moral system of thinking and judging. It deals more with what ought to be or what ought not to be in terms of business practices. Carroll, Buchholtz, 2008242,243) So its rather impossible for a large company such as PwC to adhere to all these respectable values. These values can be quickly bewildered in the general public, because everywhere, they are trying to make money and advance the business, whether this honorable behavior is observe or ignored. Neal A. Roberts was constantly trying to uncover the corrupt business of the company, because he has a higher ethical consciousness and does not want PwC to get away with its molest behavior. Identify the ethical issues in this case. at that place are three ethical issues in this case. Firstly the cheating on customers out of discounts. The firm PwC earns millions of dollars on rebates, which are not being returned to the clients in form of savings, but rather, the firm was keeping these rebates for themselves. The second e thical issue is that PwC is giving false information to the firms clients, by telling them a wrong amount for the airline tickets and other travel expenses. The last ethical issue is the cover-up of the firms corrupt activity.The company PwC does not tell their clients and their employees some the firms illegal behavior. All these ethical issues belong to the organizational level (or firm level). These issues may carry consequences for the companys reputation and triumph in the community and also for the kind of ethical environment or culture that will prevail on a day-to-day ass at the office. In addition, how the issue is handled may have real organizational consequences (Carroll, Buchholtz, 2008289,290). A survey conducted by the Ethics Resource Center reveal what managers and employees are up against. on that point you can see, that 19 percent of the asked employees mentioned lying to employees, customers, vendors, or the public (Carroll, Buchholtz, 2008290) is one of the virtually pursuitionable practices that employees immediately face in their work lives (Carroll, Buchholtz, 2008291). Who are the stakeholders and what are their stakes? The Stakeholders in case 14 are the customers, the federal government, the company PwC, the partners in business and the employees.The customers stakes are to get the accountability service for the money they paid, to get good quality and to be set honest and fair. however in this case the customers are not getting the rebates that they should be rewarded. Furthermore the stakes of the federal government are that the company PwC can pay the taxes and acts legally and ethically. However, the federal government was not only lied to about speculations and regulations, but they were also lied to as the customers themselves. Moreover the stakes of PwC are that they can keep on the market with the other companies, that their employees are motivated nd make a good work, that their company is creditworthy, so in othe r words liquidity is given, that they have many customers and good conditions for suppliers. The stakes of the partners in business are that they want to know how the competitive company PwC is in the market and how big their market shares are. But the other businesses are getting tarnished. At last the employees stakes are to work in a nice working atmosphere, to get fair wages and also to be treated honest and fair.What is your appraisal of the ethics of the travel expense billing practices described in the case? What are the ethical arguments for and against them? My appraisal of the ethics of the travel expense billing practices described in the case is what the company PwC did is wrong, because it is not right and fair. They violate consumer rights, employee rights and shareholder rights by offending against the main ethical principles, such as the regard as for Persons, the Principle of Beneficence and the Principle of Justice.In this connection Respect for Persons means that individuals should be treated as autonomous agents and that persons with diminished autonomy are entitled to protection. Further the Principle of Beneficence indicates that persons are treated in an ethical manner not only by respecting their decisions and protecting them from harm, but also by making efforts to secure their well-being. Two general rules have been formulated as complementary expressions of beneficent actions in this sense (1) do not harm and (2) maximize possible benefits and minimize possible harms.As with all hard cases, the different claims covered by the principle of beneficence may come into conflict and describe difficult choices. Moreover the Principle of Justice says that equals ought to be treated equally. (http//www. stmarys-ca. edu/institutional-review-board/ prefatorial-ethical-principles) The companys behavior meets the basic level of the CSR pyramid, which says be profitable, but on the other side it goes against legal, ethical and philantropical responsibilities. In most decisionmaking situations, ethics, economics, and law become the central expectations that must be considered and balanced against each other in the quest to make wise decisions (Carroll, Buchholtz, 2008249), but in this case, the company does not obey this rule. PwC only refers to the ethical basis be profitable and ignores the other responsibilities, which makes the whole behavior of the firm illegal and not ethical.