soo..... Hi Everyone! Hope you enjoy the read!



A multinational enterprise enforces a code of conduct determining the appropriate management of their sweatshop, this determination intends to support the rights of the individual labourer (both positive and negative) with the sole purpose being: to protect/enhance their own "company image" (their most valued asset). Would the enterprise in turn be using the labourer as a means to their own end? Or does the utilitarian view make an acceptation for this practice as it would be indirectly treating the employee as a human in a situation where they would have otherwise not done so?
I suppose the assumptions I am making are: The company was not required by any force other then their own self interest (attracting more consumers) to implement the new code of conduct. Also, the ignorant sweatshop employee is unaware of the motives for which the company has implemented the new code of conduct . The employees would likely perceive their employer as wanting to treating them with dignity and respect (as an equal human) to justify the use of the services they provide the company. However treating the employee as a human would merely be a consequence of the companies own desire to make more money via the already exploited sweatshop employee.



I apologize if I overcomplicated things...

Look forward to your responses!


If you need me to elaborate on any of this I can try....

I tried posting under "Ethics" but it said something about how I had to post here first idk...



-pigs