a) What action do you visualize should be taken by the competent authority against the food company for violating the laid down domestic food standard and selling rejected export products in the domestic market?
b) What course of action is available with the food company to resolve the crisis and bring back its lost reputation?
c) Examine the ethical dilemma involved in the case.
(Answer in 250 words)
a) The competent authority should take strong action against the food company for violating domestic food standards and selling rejected export products in the domestic market. This type of behavior is not only unethical, but it also poses a significant risk to the health and safety of consumers. The competent authority should consider revoking the approval given to the food company to sell its products in the domestic market and impose heavy fines and penalties to deter such behavior in the future.
b) In order to resolve the crisis and bring back its lost reputation, the food company should take several steps. Firstly, it should issue a public apology for its actions and take full responsibility for the violations. It should also assure the public that it has taken corrective measures to ensure that such violations do not occur in the future. This could include implementing stricter quality control measures and increasing transparency in its operations.
c) The ethical dilemma in this case is the conflict between the food company’s desire to maximize profits and its responsibility to ensure the safety and quality of its products. The company should prioritize the health and safety of its customers over its own financial interests. It should not engage in activities that could potentially harm its customers or damage its reputation. By taking the necessary steps to address the violations and rebuild its reputation, the food company can demonstrate its commitment to ethical conduct and restore public trust.