Deck 3: Philosophers Contributions

Question 1

Adverse selection occurs when one party has an information advantage over the other party. In the case of insurance, people taking out insurance know more about their health and lifestyle than the insurance company. Therefore, in order to reduce information asymmetry, the insurance company asks prospective customers to complete a medical questionnaire and/ or submit to a medical examination. Knowing the health risks associated with the people taking out insurance allows the insurance company to better adjust the premiums that it charges. For example, the premium for smokers is higher than for non-smokers.
Some people are subject to genetically inherited health problems, such as Alzheimer's, ALS, and Huntington's disease. Huntington's, for example, is an incurable degenerative brain disorder that affects about one in ten thousand people. Children of a parent who has Huntington's have a fifty percent chance of inheriting the disease. Legislation in Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Norway, and Sweden make it illegal to discriminate against people who may have inherited diseases. Similar legislation was enacted in the United States. The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act, signed by President Bush in May 2008, prohibits employment and insurance discrimination simply on the basis that a person has a genetic predisposition to developing a disease in the future.
There is no such legislation in Canada. But, in February 2010, Member of Parliament Judy Wasylycia-Leis announced that she would be tabling a private members bill against genetic discrimination. She is opposed to genetic discrimination for three reasons. "One is that people who carry genes that code for particular diseases may or may not eventually develop them. The second is that some people may not want to be forced to take a test because they don't want to know what their eventual fate in life may be. Finally, the third is that people who do want to take a test for health reasons may not do so because they fear having the results used against them."
Are insurance companies acting responsibly when they require customers to disclose medical information and/or submit to a medical examination?

Answer 1

It is reasonable to conclude that an insurance company is acting responsibly when it requires customers to disclose medical information and/or submit to a medical examination - if that information is solely used for assessing the insurance firm's overall actuarial risk. Unfortunately, because it cannot be assured that policyholders will continue to have health insurance with a particular company in both good (medical) times and bad, insurance companies often require medical disclosures from individuals as a way of protecting the insurance company's finances. One can contend that in this way the insurer is acting responsibly because it is seeking to protect the larger group (its current policyholders) over an individual; however, in appearance, and in actuality, the practice is to maximize the insurer's profits.

Question 2

Alex McAdams, the recently retired CEO of Athletic Shoes, was honored to be asked to join the Board of Consolidated Mines International Inc. Alex continues to sit on the Board of Athletic Shoes, as well as the Board of Pharma-Advantage, another publicly traded company on the New York Stock Exchange. However, CMI, as it is known, is a major step up for Alex.
CMI was formed as the United Mines Company in the 1870s, by an American railway magnate, and in 1985 it became Consolidated Mines International Inc. It operates mines in Central America and northern South America. In 2004, its revenues were approximately $4.5 billion and it employed about 25,000 people worldwide.
In deciding whether to accept the board seat, Alex conducted his own due diligence. As a result, there were two issues that he wanted to raise with Cameron Derry, the CEO of CMI. One concerned the allegations of questionable business practices. The other concerned the political instability in several of the Latin American countries in which the CMI mines are located. Today Alex was meeting with Cameron at the Long Bar Lounge.
During lunch Cameron candidly talked about the history of the company and the bad press that it often received. "In the 1920s we were accused of bribing government officials and using our political connections to have unions outlawed. In the 1950s we were accused of participating in the overthrow of a Latin American government. In the 1990s there were charges that we were exploiting our employees, polluting the environment, and facilitating the importation of cocaine into the U.S. But, none of these allegations has ever been proven in a court of law," said Cameron. "And we've even successfully sued one newspaper chain that published a series of these unproven stories about us.
"As for the political environment, Alex, you're right. There is no effective government in many of the countries in which we operate. In fact it is often the paramilitary that are in control of the countryside where we have our mines. These are very unsavory organizations, Alex. They have their own death squads. They have been involved in the massacre, assassination, kidnapping, and torture of tens of thousands of Latin Americans, most of them peasants and workers, as well as trade unionists and left-wing political figures."
"Do they interfere with CMI's operations?" asked Alex.
"No, and that's because we've been paying them off. It's now 2007 and we've been paying them since 1997. To date we've given them about $1.7 million in total. Don't look so shocked, Alex. Occasionally, we have to do business with some very unsavory characters. And the United Peoples Liberation Front that controls much of the region around our mines is probably the worst of the lot. They are involved in disappearances, murder, rape, and drug trafficking. The payments we make to them are for our protection. If we don't make these payments it could result in harm to our personnel and property."
"That's extortion!"
"We don't call it that. We list these payments as being for 'security services,' but we have no invoices to support the payments, and beginning in 2002 we began making direct cash payments to them. "But, we now have an additional problem. The United States government has declared the United Peoples Liberation Front to be a terrorist organization, and our outside legal counsel has advised us to stop making the payments. But if we stop I'm afraid of what might happen to our employees. I don't want to support drug trafficking and terrorism, but I need our mines to stay open.
"I'm telling you this, Alex, because if you join the Board, the first item on next month's agenda is these payments. I want the Board to approve that we continue to make these payments in order to ensure the safety of our Latin American employees and operations."
If Alex joins the Board, should he vote in favor of continuing to make the payments to the United Peoples Liberation Front?

Answer 2

The only argument in favor of continuing the terrorist payments, other than the "promised" protection of employees, is that the payments are economically beneficial to the Company and its stakeholders. The terrorist payments are similar to an insurance policy that ensures the firm will be able to protect its economic interests in the area.
The arguments against making the payments are both legal and ethical. The Board has been advised by its legal counsel that the payments are illegal under U.S. law and there are a number of cases where U.S. based companies are considered liable for illegal acts in their foreign operations - even when those acts are not considered illegal in their local geography.
From a utilitarianism perspective, the payments are unethical because while they may protect the Company's employees, the National Peoples Liberation Army (NPLA) is allegedly involved in murder, rape, drug trafficking, extortion and other activities that have a negative impact on the broader society.

Question 3

Throughout 2009, the world was plagued with the H1N1 swine flu epidemic. The H1N1 influenza virus, which began in Mexico, was spreading rapidly. In June the World Health Organization (WHO) in Geneva declared it to be a global pandemic and suggested that people forgo international travel, especially to countries such as Mexico.
Those who caught the virus would suffer from chills, fever, headaches, coughing, pain, weakness, and general discomfort. At the extreme it could kill, and thousands around the world died from the disease. In order to minimize the chances of catching swine flu, the WHO recommended that everyone be inoculated against the disease. However, there was not enough vaccine currently available and so a priority system had to be established so that those who were at greater risk should be inoculated first. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in Atlanta recommended the following people be in the priority group to receive the vaccine first: pregnant women, caregivers of young children, health care and emergency medical service personnel, people from 6 months to 24 years of age, and people from age 24 to 65 who have a greater risk of developing complications from the virus. The risks to people over 65 years of age are less than for younger age groups and so the elderly were not included in the priority group.
Although many people chose not to receive the vaccine, the line ups of those who wanted to be inoculated were often hours long. Sometimes people waited all day only to be told at the end of the day that the supply of the vaccine had run out. On November 2, 2009, BusinessWeek reported that Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, and a number of other large employers in New York city were given the vaccine to distribute. Although these companies were to follow the CDC priority group guidelines, there was the appearance that these employees were line jumping, especially after it was revealed that Goldman Sachs received as many doses as the Lennox Hill Hospital. At the same time, it was reported that many of the Calgary Flames hockey players, along with their families, the coaching staff, and management, had also received the swine flu vaccine. None of these people were in the priority group.
If you were the CEO of the company that manufactured the swine flu vaccine, would you ensure that all your employees were inoculated first, or would you recommend that they too wait in line?

Answer 3

The manufacturer has several reasons that justify priority inoculation of its employees:
• Employee health is important to the society because they are needed to continue to manufacture the vaccine.
• The manufacturer might want to reduce any incentive its employees have to steal the vaccine.
• The manufacturer's employees might be at higher risk for developing the disease if they were exposed during the research and/or production process.
The manufacturer also has several reasons to justify that its employees do not receive priority inoculations:
• The Company might be perceived as putting its own interest against those of the greater society - in other words, it might be perceived as behaving unethically or immorally.
• There are individuals who are at greater risk (and therefore greater need) of inoculation than some (or all) of the manufacturer's employees.
It seems reasonable to conclude that the manufacturing CEO would ultimately make a decision in coordination with governmental, medical and relief workers. If the inoculation of certain employees will help ensure a continued supply of vaccine, then it is likely that they would be included in a priority group. However, it is not a decision that the manufacturer should make on its own.

Question 4

How would you respond when someone makes a decision that adversely affects you while saying, "it's nothing personal it's just business"? Is business impersonal?

Question 5

Adverse selection occurs when one party has an information advantage over the other party. In the case of insurance, people taking out insurance know more about their health and lifestyle than the insurance company. Therefore, in order to reduce information asymmetry, the insurance company asks prospective customers to complete a medical questionnaire and/ or submit to a medical examination. Knowing the health risks associated with the people taking out insurance allows the insurance company to better adjust the premiums that it charges. For example, the premium for smokers is higher than for non-smokers.
Some people are subject to genetically inherited health problems, such as Alzheimer's, ALS, and Huntington's disease. Huntington's, for example, is an incurable degenerative brain disorder that affects about one in ten thousand people. Children of a parent who has Huntington's have a fifty percent chance of inheriting the disease. Legislation in Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Norway, and Sweden make it illegal to discriminate against people who may have inherited diseases. Similar legislation was enacted in the United States. The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act, signed by President Bush in May 2008, prohibits employment and insurance discrimination simply on the basis that a person has a genetic predisposition to developing a disease in the future.
There is no such legislation in Canada. But, in February 2010, Member of Parliament Judy Wasylycia-Leis announced that she would be tabling a private members bill against genetic discrimination. She is opposed to genetic discrimination for three reasons. "One is that people who carry genes that code for particular diseases may or may not eventually develop them. The second is that some people may not want to be forced to take a test because they don't want to know what their eventual fate in life may be. Finally, the third is that people who do want to take a test for health reasons may not do so because they fear having the results used against them."
How would you argue in favor of Judy Wasylycia-Leis's proposed legislation?

Question 6

Is someone who makes an ethical decision based on enlightened self-interest worthy of more or less praise than someone who makes a similar decision based solely on economic considerations?

Question 7

Alex McAdams, the recently retired CEO of Athletic Shoes, was honored to be asked to join the Board of Consolidated Mines International Inc. Alex continues to sit on the Board of Athletic Shoes, as well as the Board of Pharma-Advantage, another publicly traded company on the New York Stock Exchange. However, CMI, as it is known, is a major step up for Alex.
CMI was formed as the United Mines Company in the 1870s, by an American railway magnate, and in 1985 it became Consolidated Mines International Inc. It operates mines in Central America and northern South America. In 2004, its revenues were approximately $4.5 billion and it employed about 25,000 people worldwide.
In deciding whether to accept the board seat, Alex conducted his own due diligence. As a result, there were two issues that he wanted to raise with Cameron Derry, the CEO of CMI. One concerned the allegations of questionable business practices. The other concerned the political instability in several of the Latin American countries in which the CMI mines are located. Today Alex was meeting with Cameron at the Long Bar Lounge.
During lunch Cameron candidly talked about the history of the company and the bad press that it often received. "In the 1920s we were accused of bribing government officials and using our political connections to have unions outlawed. In the 1950s we were accused of participating in the overthrow of a Latin American government. In the 1990s there were charges that we were exploiting our employees, polluting the environment, and facilitating the importation of cocaine into the U.S. But, none of these allegations has ever been proven in a court of law," said Cameron. "And we've even successfully sued one newspaper chain that published a series of these unproven stories about us.
"As for the political environment, Alex, you're right. There is no effective government in many of the countries in which we operate. In fact it is often the paramilitary that are in control of the countryside where we have our mines. These are very unsavory organizations, Alex. They have their own death squads. They have been involved in the massacre, assassination, kidnapping, and torture of tens of thousands of Latin Americans, most of them peasants and workers, as well as trade unionists and left-wing political figures."
"Do they interfere with CMI's operations?" asked Alex.
"No, and that's because we've been paying them off. It's now 2007 and we've been paying them since 1997. To date we've given them about $1.7 million in total. Don't look so shocked, Alex. Occasionally, we have to do business with some very unsavory characters. And the United Peoples Liberation Front that controls much of the region around our mines is probably the worst of the lot. They are involved in disappearances, murder, rape, and drug trafficking. The payments we make to them are for our protection. If we don't make these payments it could result in harm to our personnel and property."
"That's extortion!"
"We don't call it that. We list these payments as being for 'security services,' but we have no invoices to support the payments, and beginning in 2002 we began making direct cash payments to them. "But, we now have an additional problem. The United States government has declared the United Peoples Liberation Front to be a terrorist organization, and our outside legal counsel has advised us to stop making the payments. But if we stop I'm afraid of what might happen to our employees. I don't want to support drug trafficking and terrorism, but I need our mines to stay open.
"I'm telling you this, Alex, because if you join the Board, the first item on next month's agenda is these payments. I want the Board to approve that we continue to make these payments in order to ensure the safety of our Latin American employees and operations."
What other options are available to Alex?

Question 8

Since happiness is extremely subjective, how would you objectively measure and assess happiness? Do you agree with J. S. Mill that arithmetic can be used to calculate happiness? Is money a good proxy for happiness?

Question 9

Adverse selection occurs when one party has an information advantage over the other party. In the case of insurance, people taking out insurance know more about their health and lifestyle than the insurance company. Therefore, in order to reduce information asymmetry, the insurance company asks prospective customers to complete a medical questionnaire and/ or submit to a medical examination. Knowing the health risks associated with the people taking out insurance allows the insurance company to better adjust the premiums that it charges. For example, the premium for smokers is higher than for non-smokers.
Some people are subject to genetically inherited health problems, such as Alzheimer's, ALS, and Huntington's disease. Huntington's, for example, is an incurable degenerative brain disorder that affects about one in ten thousand people. Children of a parent who has Huntington's have a fifty percent chance of inheriting the disease. Legislation in Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Norway, and Sweden make it illegal to discriminate against people who may have inherited diseases. Similar legislation was enacted in the United States. The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act, signed by President Bush in May 2008, prohibits employment and insurance discrimination simply on the basis that a person has a genetic predisposition to developing a disease in the future.
There is no such legislation in Canada. But, in February 2010, Member of Parliament Judy Wasylycia-Leis announced that she would be tabling a private members bill against genetic discrimination. She is opposed to genetic discrimination for three reasons. "One is that people who carry genes that code for particular diseases may or may not eventually develop them. The second is that some people may not want to be forced to take a test because they don't want to know what their eventual fate in life may be. Finally, the third is that people who do want to take a test for health reasons may not do so because they fear having the results used against them."
How would you argue against Judy Wasylycia-Leis's proposed legislation?

Question 10

Is there any categorical imperative that you can think of that would have universal application? Isn't there an exception to every rule?

Question 11

Assume that Firm A is a publicly traded company that puts its financial statements on the web. This information can be accessed and read by anyone, even those who do not own shares of Firm A. This a free-rider situation, where an investor can use Firm A as a means to making an investment decision about another company. Is this ethical? Does free-riding treat another individual as a means and not also as an end?

Question 12

How does a business executive demonstrate virtue when dealing with a disgruntled shareholder at the annual meeting?

Question 13

Commuters who have more than one passenger in the car are permitted to drive in a special lane on the highway while all the other motorists have to contend with stop-and-go traffic. What does this have to do with ethics? Assess this situation using each of the following ethical theories: utilitarianism, deontology, justice, fairness and virtue ethics.

Question 14

Throughout 2009, the world was plagued with the H1N1 swine flu epidemic. The H1N1 influenza virus, which began in Mexico, was spreading rapidly. In June the World Health Organization (WHO) in Geneva declared it to be a global pandemic and suggested that people forgo international travel, especially to countries such as Mexico.
Those who caught the virus would suffer from chills, fever, headaches, coughing, pain, weakness, and general discomfort. At the extreme it could kill, and thousands around the world died from the disease. In order to minimize the chances of catching swine flu, the WHO recommended that everyone be inoculated against the disease. However, there was not enough vaccine currently available and so a priority system had to be established so that those who were at greater risk should be inoculated first. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in Atlanta recommended the following people be in the priority group to receive the vaccine first: pregnant women, caregivers of young children, health care and emergency medical service personnel, people from 6 months to 24 years of age, and people from age 24 to 65 who have a greater risk of developing complications from the virus. The risks to people over 65 years of age are less than for younger age groups and so the elderly were not included in the priority group.
Although many people chose not to receive the vaccine, the line ups of those who wanted to be inoculated were often hours long. Sometimes people waited all day only to be told at the end of the day that the supply of the vaccine had run out. On November 2, 2009, BusinessWeek reported that Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, and a number of other large employers in New York city were given the vaccine to distribute. Although these companies were to follow the CDC priority group guidelines, there was the appearance that these employees were line jumping, especially after it was revealed that Goldman Sachs received as many doses as the Lennox Hill Hospital. At the same time, it was reported that many of the Calgary Flames hockey players, along with their families, the coaching staff, and management, had also received the swine flu vaccine. None of these people were in the priority group.
From a utilitarian point of view, who do you think should be in the priority group? From a justice as fairness perspective, who should be in the priority group?

Question 15

On October 1, 2012, IKEA apologized for removing women from the photographs in the IKEA catalogues that were shipped to Saudi Arabia. IKEA is a Swedish company that was founded in 1943. It is now the world's largest furniture retailer with stores in over 41 countries. IKEA has been in the forefront of environmental and social responsibility. It generously contributes to charitable organizations. It is a world leader on producing eco-friendly furniture. For three years in a row it was on the Fortune's 100 Best Companies to Work For, and has been named four times as one of the 100 Best Companies for Working Mothers by Working Mothers magazine.
Since 1951, IKEA has been publishing an annual catalogue. In 2012 it printed 212 million catalogues in 29 languages. The images in the catalogue were identical across the world, until recently. In the 2012 Saudi Arabia catalogue the images of all women were deleted. In one bathroom picture, a mother is with her son, and the father is with a younger boy. In the Saudi version there is no woman; she has been airbrushed out of the photograph. There is only the father and the two boys. In another photo, there are two women smiling at each other with four pieces of furniture in the background; in the Saudi Arabia catalogue there is only the four pieces of furniture. In other pictures, women have been digitally removed, or else have been altered to become men.
A spokeswoman for IKEA admitted that the error occurred at head office and was not done by the Saudi Arabian franchisee. She said that excluding women from the catalogue was in conflict with the values of IKEA. "We encourage fair treatment and equal employment opportunities without regard to race, ethnicity, religion, gender, disability, age, or sexual orientation."
Discuss the pros and cons of altering the catalogue using:
a. Deontology,
b. Utilitarianism, and
c. Virtue ethics.

Question 16

Adverse selection occurs when one party has an information advantage over the other party. In the case of insurance, people taking out insurance know more about their health and lifestyle than the insurance company. Therefore, in order to reduce information asymmetry, the insurance company asks prospective customers to complete a medical questionnaire and/ or submit to a medical examination. Knowing the health risks associated with the people taking out insurance allows the insurance company to better adjust the premiums that it charges. For example, the premium for smokers is higher than for non-smokers.
Some people are subject to genetically inherited health problems, such as Alzheimer's, ALS, and Huntington's disease. Huntington's, for example, is an incurable degenerative brain disorder that affects about one in ten thousand people. Children of a parent who has Huntington's have a fifty percent chance of inheriting the disease. Legislation in Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Norway, and Sweden make it illegal to discriminate against people who may have inherited diseases. Similar legislation was enacted in the United States. The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act, signed by President Bush in May 2008, prohibits employment and insurance discrimination simply on the basis that a person has a genetic predisposition to developing a disease in the future.
There is no such legislation in Canada. But, in February 2010, Member of Parliament Judy Wasylycia-Leis announced that she would be tabling a private members bill against genetic discrimination. She is opposed to genetic discrimination for three reasons. "One is that people who carry genes that code for particular diseases may or may not eventually develop them. The second is that some people may not want to be forced to take a test because they don't want to know what their eventual fate in life may be. Finally, the third is that people who do want to take a test for health reasons may not do so because they fear having the results used against them."
Do you consider it to be unethical for insurance companies to charge high risk people a higher premium than low-risk people?

Question 17

Alex McAdams, the recently retired CEO of Athletic Shoes, was honored to be asked to join the Board of Consolidated Mines International Inc. Alex continues to sit on the Board of Athletic Shoes, as well as the Board of Pharma-Advantage, another publicly traded company on the New York Stock Exchange. However, CMI, as it is known, is a major step up for Alex.
CMI was formed as the United Mines Company in the 1870s, by an American railway magnate, and in 1985 it became Consolidated Mines International Inc. It operates mines in Central America and northern South America. In 2004, its revenues were approximately $4.5 billion and it employed about 25,000 people worldwide.
In deciding whether to accept the board seat, Alex conducted his own due diligence. As a result, there were two issues that he wanted to raise with Cameron Derry, the CEO of CMI. One concerned the allegations of questionable business practices. The other concerned the political instability in several of the Latin American countries in which the CMI mines are located. Today Alex was meeting with Cameron at the Long Bar Lounge.
During lunch Cameron candidly talked about the history of the company and the bad press that it often received. "In the 1920s we were accused of bribing government officials and using our political connections to have unions outlawed. In the 1950s we were accused of participating in the overthrow of a Latin American government. In the 1990s there were charges that we were exploiting our employees, polluting the environment, and facilitating the importation of cocaine into the U.S. But, none of these allegations has ever been proven in a court of law," said Cameron. "And we've even successfully sued one newspaper chain that published a series of these unproven stories about us.
"As for the political environment, Alex, you're right. There is no effective government in many of the countries in which we operate. In fact it is often the paramilitary that are in control of the countryside where we have our mines. These are very unsavory organizations, Alex. They have their own death squads. They have been involved in the massacre, assassination, kidnapping, and torture of tens of thousands of Latin Americans, most of them peasants and workers, as well as trade unionists and left-wing political figures."
"Do they interfere with CMI's operations?" asked Alex.
"No, and that's because we've been paying them off. It's now 2007 and we've been paying them since 1997. To date we've given them about $1.7 million in total. Don't look so shocked, Alex. Occasionally, we have to do business with some very unsavory characters. And the United Peoples Liberation Front that controls much of the region around our mines is probably the worst of the lot. They are involved in disappearances, murder, rape, and drug trafficking. The payments we make to them are for our protection. If we don't make these payments it could result in harm to our personnel and property."
"That's extortion!"
"We don't call it that. We list these payments as being for 'security services,' but we have no invoices to support the payments, and beginning in 2002 we began making direct cash payments to them. "But, we now have an additional problem. The United States government has declared the United Peoples Liberation Front to be a terrorist organization, and our outside legal counsel has advised us to stop making the payments. But if we stop I'm afraid of what might happen to our employees. I don't want to support drug trafficking and terrorism, but I need our mines to stay open.
"I'm telling you this, Alex, because if you join the Board, the first item on next month's agenda is these payments. I want the Board to approve that we continue to make these payments in order to ensure the safety of our Latin American employees and operations."
Should Alex join the Board of directors of Consolidated Mines International Inc.?

Question 18

Throughout 2009, the world was plagued with the H1N1 swine flu epidemic. The H1N1 influenza virus, which began in Mexico, was spreading rapidly. In June the World Health Organization (WHO) in Geneva declared it to be a global pandemic and suggested that people forgo international travel, especially to countries such as Mexico.
Those who caught the virus would suffer from chills, fever, headaches, coughing, pain, weakness, and general discomfort. At the extreme it could kill, and thousands around the world died from the disease. In order to minimize the chances of catching swine flu, the WHO recommended that everyone be inoculated against the disease. However, there was not enough vaccine currently available and so a priority system had to be established so that those who were at greater risk should be inoculated first. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in Atlanta recommended the following people be in the priority group to receive the vaccine first: pregnant women, caregivers of young children, health care and emergency medical service personnel, people from 6 months to 24 years of age, and people from age 24 to 65 who have a greater risk of developing complications from the virus. The risks to people over 65 years of age are less than for younger age groups and so the elderly were not included in the priority group.
Although many people chose not to receive the vaccine, the line ups of those who wanted to be inoculated were often hours long. Sometimes people waited all day only to be told at the end of the day that the supply of the vaccine had run out. On November 2, 2009, BusinessWeek reported that Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, and a number of other large employers in New York city were given the vaccine to distribute. Although these companies were to follow the CDC priority group guidelines, there was the appearance that these employees were line jumping, especially after it was revealed that Goldman Sachs received as many doses as the Lennox Hill Hospital. At the same time, it was reported that many of the Calgary Flames hockey players, along with their families, the coaching staff, and management, had also received the swine flu vaccine. None of these people were in the priority group.
Should people who make society flourish through their economic productivity, such as the employees of Goldman Sachs, be put into the priority group? Should people who contribute to making life enjoyable, such as entertainers and athletes, be put into the priority group?

Question 19

On October 1, 2012, IKEA apologized for removing women from the photographs in the IKEA catalogues that were shipped to Saudi Arabia. IKEA is a Swedish company that was founded in 1943. It is now the world's largest furniture retailer with stores in over 41 countries. IKEA has been in the forefront of environmental and social responsibility. It generously contributes to charitable organizations. It is a world leader on producing eco-friendly furniture. For three years in a row it was on the Fortune's 100 Best Companies to Work For, and has been named four times as one of the 100 Best Companies for Working Mothers by Working Mothers magazine.
Since 1951, IKEA has been publishing an annual catalogue. In 2012 it printed 212 million catalogues in 29 languages. The images in the catalogue were identical across the world, until recently. In the 2012 Saudi Arabia catalogue the images of all women were deleted. In one bathroom picture, a mother is with her son, and the father is with a younger boy. In the Saudi version there is no woman; she has been airbrushed out of the photograph. There is only the father and the two boys. In another photo, there are two women smiling at each other with four pieces of furniture in the background; in the Saudi Arabia catalogue there is only the four pieces of furniture. In other pictures, women have been digitally removed, or else have been altered to become men.
A spokeswoman for IKEA admitted that the error occurred at head office and was not done by the Saudi Arabian franchisee. She said that excluding women from the catalogue was in conflict with the values of IKEA. "We encourage fair treatment and equal employment opportunities without regard to race, ethnicity, religion, gender, disability, age, or sexual orientation."
Should a company alter its marketing campaigns to reflect biases that might be prevalent in various countries in which the company does business?