Atty. Vivian T. Dabu

Ateneo-Regis, AGSB, Clark

a consideration given or offered to an employee by a person outside the firm with the understanding that, when the employee transacts business for the firm, the employee will deal favorably with that person or that’s person’s firm.

occurs when an employee demands a consideration from persons outside the firm as a condition for dealing favorably with those persons when the employee transacts business for the firm.

may or maybe unethical

if the agent does not give favored treatment to those from whom the agent accepts gifts and is not prejudiced against those who fail to give a gift, no actual conflict of interest is created.

a potential conflict of interest however may exist and the act may encourage a practice that in some instances becomes an actual conflict of interest or that may be subtly affecting the independence of a person’s judgment.

What is the value of the gift? ◦ Is it substantial enough to influence one’s

decisions?

What is the purpose of the gift? ◦ Is it intended or accepted as a bribe?

What are the circumstances under which the gift was given? ◦ Was it given openly? ◦ Was it given to celebrate a special event

(Christmas, a birthday, a store opening)?

Vincent Barry, Moral Issues in Business, pp. 237-238

What is the position of the recipient of the gift? ◦ Is the recipient in a position to influence his own

firm’s dealings with the giver of the gift?

What is the accepted business practice in the area? ◦ Is it part of an open and well-known industry

practice?

What is the company’s policy? ◦ Does the company forbid acceptance of gifts?

What is the law? ◦ Is the gift forbidden by a law?

Vincent Barry, Moral Issues in Business, pp. 237-238

appropriating, taking or using the resources or properties of the employer for his own use or benefit without the consent of the rightful owner.

unauthorized examination, use or copying of computer information or program.

The right to exclusive use of the asset The right to decide whether and how others may

use the asset The right to sell, trade or give away the asset The right to any income generated by the asset The right to modify or change the asset. To usurp any of the rights that attach to property,

including the rights pertaining to use, is a form of property theft and is, therefore, unethical.

Proprietary information consist of non- public information that:

◦ concerns a company’s own activities,

technologies, future plans, policies, or records and that if known by competitors would materially affect the company’s ability to compete commercially against those competitors;

◦ is owned by the company (although it might not be patented or copyrighted) because it was developed by the company for its private use from resources it owns or was purchased for its private use from others with its own funds; and

◦ the company indicates through explicit directives, security measures, or a contractual agreement with employees that is does not want anyone outside the company to have that information.

Have their employees signed contracts agreeing not to work for competitors for 1 or 2 years after leaving the company

Continuing remuneration or future retirement benefits in exchange for their not revealing proprietary information

A company’s right to keep informa tion secret is not absolute, but must be balanced against the legitimate rights of others.

The act of buying and selling a company’s stock on the basis of “inside” information about the company.

Inside or insider information about a company is proprietary information about a company that is not available to the general public outside the company, but whose availability to the general public would have a material or significant impact on the price of the company’s stock.

Anyone is guilty who trades in stock knowingly using stolen, private information that can affect the stock’s price, that is, anyone who knowingly buys or sells stock using information that they know was acquired by a person who had a duty to keep that information confidential.

1.Insider trading brings the market price of the company’s stock equivalent to the true underlying value of the stock.

2.Insider trading does not harm anyone, but benefits those who sell stocks to him or others later.

3.Insider trader has no unfair advantage over others since many of the people who buy and sell stocks on the stock market have more or better information than others.

1.The information that the insider trader uses does not belong to him but to the shareholders-owners.

2.Insider trading is harmful to everyone in the market and to society in general as it tends to reduce the size of the market and increases the costs of buying and selling stocks in the market.

3.The information advantage of the insider is unfair or unjust as it comes from stealing the fruits of someone else’s labor or resources (the company’s owners).

It violates stockholder’s rights It is based on an unjust

informational advantage It harms society’s overall utility In short, it violates our standards of

rights, justice, and utility.

Velasquez, Manuel G., Business Ethics: Concepts and Cases, 6th edition

Images from google.com

Others as noted in the corresponding slides