1. The Utilitarian Benefits of Caltex Plant versus the Human Rights and Justice Violations
I believe that the question as to whether the possible utilitarian benefits of building the Caltex plant could have been more important than the possible violations of moral rights and of justice was overshadowed by the lack of choices and desperate situation in South Africa.
Caltex faced such a dilemma in balancing the pros and cons of continuing operations of the plant in the country. I dont think that the question as to which was more important mattered because whether the Caltex plant was established or not would not have made much difference. Violations of human rights and justice such as segregation of black and white South Africans in eating and habitat, extremely discriminating salary gaps, the influx control system would have been continuously enforced with or without the establishment of the Caltex plant.
The utilitarian benefits of establishing the plant such as generating at least 20 of the investments every year and the fact that Caltex was the biggest foreign investment in South Africa are just one among the many utilitarian benefits for the company. Anyhow, this could have been achieved by any Caltex plant anywhere else around the world.
Among the convictions of the anti-apartheid groups is that the Caltex operations in South Africa supported the apartheid system. This could have been true, but that support was inadvertent and incidental. As a matter of fact, the black South Africans benefited from Caltex in terms of long-term aspects because the operations of the company and its alleged support of the white minority triggered massive protests from the blacks. These started and strengthened the movement against the Apartheid regime.
2. Voting on the Caltex Resolutions
a. Asking Caltex to terminate its operations- I would vote as No.
The termination of Caltexs operations or its withdrawal from South Africa would not have made much difference in how the government violated the rights and humanity of the black South Africans. While it is true that somehow, the operations and presence of Caltex supported the machineries of the government, the black South Africans were at least provided some comfort and hope in being employed by Caltex. Terminating the oil companys operations would have exacerbated the difficulties of the blacks by depriving them of the slightest of hopes in having jobs. The presence and operations of Caltex was also inadvertently enlightening the entire world about the horrors and evils of the apartheid. If such a big foreign investor were to leave the country, other foreign investors would have left soon as well. Imagine what would happen to the South Africans, especially the abused blacks
b. Asking Caltex not to sell to the military or the police
My vote in this resolution is No as well. Basically, each individual, group or party has the right to acquire or purchase what it needs. It is also the commercial and legal requirement of a company to sell and make available its products and services to anyone who has the capacity to purchase such. Of course, we know about the evils of the military and the police during the apartheid regime. We also know that the oil products were instrumental to the military and the police in implementing their abusive and oppressive strategies towards the discriminated people. However, restricting that sector from purchasing oil products would have resulted in more violent, oppressive and probably catastrophic decision for Caltex.
Legal sanctions could also have been imposed on the members of the management and the stockholders. We also know that the police or military could cause violent and destructive retaliatory actions against the company, including the black employees. With this in mind, the stockholders opted for the safer, peaceful and negotiable decision to continue selling to the military.
My vote on this resolution is Yes. The four conditions asked for by the late Rev. Desmond Tutu were all basic human rights and privileges which every company can opt to provide. The implementation of these four conditions would have given rise to several positive changes for the blacks. If the foreign companies within South Africa uniformly and bravely implemented these, the blacks and other discriminated races would have been given the chance to live better and more hopeful lives. The abusive and oppressive policies of the South African regime would also have been minimized. Implementation of the Tutus conditions or principles would also have constituted the companies adherence to human rights and equality. I believe that these conditions were also compliant to international laws, as well as to labor rules and policies in most democratic countries around the world. Any strong or violent reaction of the South African government against the implementation of these conditions would have given rise to more sanctions and action by the international community. That would have strengthened and inspired the movement against the oppressions of the Apartheid regime.
3. The Kind of Responses that Texaco and SOCAL Managers Should Have Made in the Resolutions
The Responses that the Texaco and SOCAL managers should have taken in consideration the various facets and factors involved such as the Caltexs business directions and goals, the employees welfare (regardless of the race), welfare of the community, welfare of the employees families, compliance to South African laws and policies, compliance to international laws and policies and human rights and justice. All of the aforementioned factors are basic considerations to be taken when deciding on major issues.
The consideration of the managers with regard to the above-mentioned factors is evidenced in their decision not to terminate the Caltex operations. If they considered such a retaliatory and one-sided tactic, they would have terminated the operations of Caltex. However, considering the possibility that the future of the blacks and other races would become bleaker by withdrawing from the country, the company continued in South Africa.
The managers decision in the second resolution also reflects the balancing of factors involved. Again, if the tactic would have been retaliatory and one-sided, the consequences would have been violent and more oppressive for the blacks. The prospects of Caltexs refusing to sell oil products to the military and police would result to more violence not only for the blacks, but for the company officials and the other employees as well.
The decision on the third resolution, to adhere to the Tutu conditions or principles was also carefully and gradually weighed by the management. Although the conditions would have guaranteed granting of human rights and privileges to the blacks, it would not have been easy for all the communities to violate the policies of the oppressive regime. Not to say the least, but more violence and more oppression would most probably result. It can be deemed that Caltex carefully considered all these possibilities. When the management decided to uphold the principles by proposing them to the Board of Directors, the uprisings and violence were already escalating, followed soon by the imposition of the martial law.
4. The Responsibilities of a Company Go Beyond High returns on Investments
Definitely, the management of every company must look beyond getting high returns for its investment. In this era, companies are already looking at the implementation of corporate social responsibility because of the paradigm that the companys goals and objectives should include not only achieving high returns, but also to protect and serve its community and environment and to uphold human rights and justice and to promote and enhance social relations. This implies that the decisions of company executives take in consideration the plight of the people. Most companies nowadays provide such amenities as family housing for its employees, educational assistance for the employees children environmental campaigns and so many other programs to help the employees and communities improve their lives.
Adherence to the law should be one of its criteria for deciding on its investments but not at the cost of sacrificing the rights and justice for others. It is a legal requirement for every company to adhere to the laws of the country where it is based. However, if these laws are violating the human rights of the people who may be employed by the company or even those around it, then the management should consider other locations. If a company decides to establish a plant in such a country, it will have no choice but to comply with its laws, such as the case with Caltex in South Africa. So, the decision should have been made before it established such a plant in South Africa because thereafter, it could no longer impose its own policies if those were not in conformity with South Africas legalities.
I believe that the question as to whether the possible utilitarian benefits of building the Caltex plant could have been more important than the possible violations of moral rights and of justice was overshadowed by the lack of choices and desperate situation in South Africa.
Caltex faced such a dilemma in balancing the pros and cons of continuing operations of the plant in the country. I dont think that the question as to which was more important mattered because whether the Caltex plant was established or not would not have made much difference. Violations of human rights and justice such as segregation of black and white South Africans in eating and habitat, extremely discriminating salary gaps, the influx control system would have been continuously enforced with or without the establishment of the Caltex plant.
The utilitarian benefits of establishing the plant such as generating at least 20 of the investments every year and the fact that Caltex was the biggest foreign investment in South Africa are just one among the many utilitarian benefits for the company. Anyhow, this could have been achieved by any Caltex plant anywhere else around the world.
Among the convictions of the anti-apartheid groups is that the Caltex operations in South Africa supported the apartheid system. This could have been true, but that support was inadvertent and incidental. As a matter of fact, the black South Africans benefited from Caltex in terms of long-term aspects because the operations of the company and its alleged support of the white minority triggered massive protests from the blacks. These started and strengthened the movement against the Apartheid regime.
2. Voting on the Caltex Resolutions
a. Asking Caltex to terminate its operations- I would vote as No.
The termination of Caltexs operations or its withdrawal from South Africa would not have made much difference in how the government violated the rights and humanity of the black South Africans. While it is true that somehow, the operations and presence of Caltex supported the machineries of the government, the black South Africans were at least provided some comfort and hope in being employed by Caltex. Terminating the oil companys operations would have exacerbated the difficulties of the blacks by depriving them of the slightest of hopes in having jobs. The presence and operations of Caltex was also inadvertently enlightening the entire world about the horrors and evils of the apartheid. If such a big foreign investor were to leave the country, other foreign investors would have left soon as well. Imagine what would happen to the South Africans, especially the abused blacks
b. Asking Caltex not to sell to the military or the police
My vote in this resolution is No as well. Basically, each individual, group or party has the right to acquire or purchase what it needs. It is also the commercial and legal requirement of a company to sell and make available its products and services to anyone who has the capacity to purchase such. Of course, we know about the evils of the military and the police during the apartheid regime. We also know that the oil products were instrumental to the military and the police in implementing their abusive and oppressive strategies towards the discriminated people. However, restricting that sector from purchasing oil products would have resulted in more violent, oppressive and probably catastrophic decision for Caltex.
Legal sanctions could also have been imposed on the members of the management and the stockholders. We also know that the police or military could cause violent and destructive retaliatory actions against the company, including the black employees. With this in mind, the stockholders opted for the safer, peaceful and negotiable decision to continue selling to the military.
My vote on this resolution is Yes. The four conditions asked for by the late Rev. Desmond Tutu were all basic human rights and privileges which every company can opt to provide. The implementation of these four conditions would have given rise to several positive changes for the blacks. If the foreign companies within South Africa uniformly and bravely implemented these, the blacks and other discriminated races would have been given the chance to live better and more hopeful lives. The abusive and oppressive policies of the South African regime would also have been minimized. Implementation of the Tutus conditions or principles would also have constituted the companies adherence to human rights and equality. I believe that these conditions were also compliant to international laws, as well as to labor rules and policies in most democratic countries around the world. Any strong or violent reaction of the South African government against the implementation of these conditions would have given rise to more sanctions and action by the international community. That would have strengthened and inspired the movement against the oppressions of the Apartheid regime.
3. The Kind of Responses that Texaco and SOCAL Managers Should Have Made in the Resolutions
The Responses that the Texaco and SOCAL managers should have taken in consideration the various facets and factors involved such as the Caltexs business directions and goals, the employees welfare (regardless of the race), welfare of the community, welfare of the employees families, compliance to South African laws and policies, compliance to international laws and policies and human rights and justice. All of the aforementioned factors are basic considerations to be taken when deciding on major issues.
The consideration of the managers with regard to the above-mentioned factors is evidenced in their decision not to terminate the Caltex operations. If they considered such a retaliatory and one-sided tactic, they would have terminated the operations of Caltex. However, considering the possibility that the future of the blacks and other races would become bleaker by withdrawing from the country, the company continued in South Africa.
The managers decision in the second resolution also reflects the balancing of factors involved. Again, if the tactic would have been retaliatory and one-sided, the consequences would have been violent and more oppressive for the blacks. The prospects of Caltexs refusing to sell oil products to the military and police would result to more violence not only for the blacks, but for the company officials and the other employees as well.
The decision on the third resolution, to adhere to the Tutu conditions or principles was also carefully and gradually weighed by the management. Although the conditions would have guaranteed granting of human rights and privileges to the blacks, it would not have been easy for all the communities to violate the policies of the oppressive regime. Not to say the least, but more violence and more oppression would most probably result. It can be deemed that Caltex carefully considered all these possibilities. When the management decided to uphold the principles by proposing them to the Board of Directors, the uprisings and violence were already escalating, followed soon by the imposition of the martial law.
4. The Responsibilities of a Company Go Beyond High returns on Investments
Definitely, the management of every company must look beyond getting high returns for its investment. In this era, companies are already looking at the implementation of corporate social responsibility because of the paradigm that the companys goals and objectives should include not only achieving high returns, but also to protect and serve its community and environment and to uphold human rights and justice and to promote and enhance social relations. This implies that the decisions of company executives take in consideration the plight of the people. Most companies nowadays provide such amenities as family housing for its employees, educational assistance for the employees children environmental campaigns and so many other programs to help the employees and communities improve their lives.
Adherence to the law should be one of its criteria for deciding on its investments but not at the cost of sacrificing the rights and justice for others. It is a legal requirement for every company to adhere to the laws of the country where it is based. However, if these laws are violating the human rights of the people who may be employed by the company or even those around it, then the management should consider other locations. If a company decides to establish a plant in such a country, it will have no choice but to comply with its laws, such as the case with Caltex in South Africa. So, the decision should have been made before it established such a plant in South Africa because thereafter, it could no longer impose its own policies if those were not in conformity with South Africas legalities.
No comments:
Post a Comment