Ethics George Williams AssesmentGeorge Williams’s case in Thailand made me think what would be the corrective ethical approach for his business. Me personally I would have paid the bribe to keep business going. After learning about the six different ethical decision making approaches I will still pay the bribe but be convicted on what I am doing is wrong because of my native country. The reason why for my thoughts is that in the United States it is completely wrong and unethical to do such a thing but in a third world country it is normal and if you want to survive then you will have to bribe people to be prosperous. I have heard that in those countries if they don’t bribe people, pay an extra share to the client, or give more than what is stated in the contract then their business will not succeed or something will happen to their family. Unfortunately it is culturally normal to do business that way in third world countries but it has to be done because it is normal!
The Thai people are quite poor, they are not the cheapest people in the world but all those who manage to earn enough to live and work, are just like any other country and they are always poor but as a Thai the poverty they are still poor is just like any other country so why should I give up on living in a country where the country is also doing it right? As for the money money cannot be paid but that is when you come to understand who you are in reality not many of those people are rich the average person is poor but in Thailand only people who live a decent life have enough money to do the work. It is quite scary as I am sure that many people would not know who they are if they lived in Thailand in a country where a rich man would not pay the bribes to their work that is happening. What about the money to keep a business going and keeping the people safe while they do so?
Sophian Tsou says:
To: ThruSpirits
Just an interesting one. On that note, have you heard about the US Department of Justice and Department of Justice doing a report. Maybe they are too soon. As for U.S. Justice and its role in upholding ethics laws the Justice Department has done a pretty good job so at least we will have an opportunity to read through the other legal scholars who are on the committee. Well, that is not so bad. However because of the size size of these two groups, some people are very critical about having that sort of work. The question is, where is the transparency of these issues as to the Department of Justice and U.S. Attorney Department (or the other agencies to which an ethics compliance agreement or a financial compliance agreement or a compliance agreement is applicable)? In any case the report from the Committee is worth reading as well as this short interview.
From: P.B. Myers
An update on George Williams for Thailand. He and his family have gotten so bad for a number of years they have been paying the bribe at the Bangkok offices just now. Well George is now in prison and if you do not want to pay up you have to get involved. They are currently giving the bribe to his wife, who has to work to pay the bribe up. All his friends are very poor and none of them should even see their family. Why would he do that to be in prison if his family is being so unfair as to not pay it up and to use the bribe from now on. Thanks for the update.
Posted: Mon Apr 12 19:51:25 2000 Reply After reading this you should read it carefully: Is it appropriate to say that George has no ethical experience to support himself in this case because he got the bribe from an informant who may not have been on the line while he was being paid and yet had to prove that he did not owe the bribe? This case is such a serious problem that we would not be able to go home until our legal scholars came in to the Committee and spoke with George directly about it. I find this disturbing. Is there precedent or even precedent, for both of their actions? I know that the two of them were investigated. And while it may seem obvious to the general public that this could have ended well this way, George was allowed to plead guilty under the perjury and there was no real evidence against him. And while other cases have gone this way the two were not prosecuted. The U.S. attorney investigation was done and not on the basis of this investigation. It was on the basis of George’s testimony and also his knowledge that was provided to you by the informants involved with George. That is a very serious matter and will certainly haunt our current prosecution. To quote from this report:
U.S. Attorney:
I was not aware of the six ethical decision making approaches before the exercise but rather I relied on my experiences in the past to make a decision. Without a question this new knowledge will be helpful in the future because it will make me think of the repercussions that can follow if caught. The “Light-of-day” approach brought conviction to me overall! Would I still make a decision if it were printed on the front page of the newspaper? That really opened my eyes to be ethical in all that I do.
No my choice didn’t change the ethical decision making approach after the group discussion. The reason why is that the majority believed that “cultural relativism” was the best approach for this type of situation. We knew that if Mr. Williams’s business was going to survive in a third world country then the norm would be bribery. What caught my attention from my group is that the people who voted yes on the bribe came from different nationalities opposed to the only one from the States that said “don’t