What stakeholders were being harmed by the VOC emissions? How would you justify your decision?
Real Life Choices in Corporate Social Responsibility
A window-and-door-manufacturing plant decided to stop outsourcing the painting of its aluminum components and install its own paint facility. The paint used for this type of metal is known as a powder-coat finish, and the application process is simply blasting the color onto the raw aluminum.
The by-product of the powder finish, VOCs (volatile organic compounds), kept the large paint line filled with a constant mist of dust, and the rest of the VOCs left the room via air ducts and blowers installed in the ceiling and were released into the atmosphere.
After the first year of operation, the regional Environment Protection Agency (EPA) inspector came through and told the owner he did not have proper “scrubbers,” or filters, in the air ducts and was causing harm to the environment around the plant. In fact, the plant was bordered on two sides by residential communities and on two other sides by wooded areas. The fine assessed was $100,000. The cost to fix the scrubbers was $1,000,000.
The following year the EPA inspector returned and once again fined the owner $100,000 because he had decided not to fix the air ducts. The process continued for the next decade.
As you read the discussion questions, keep in mind everything you have read in the chapter to help you assess and make recommendations for this case.
Discussion Questions
- What stakeholders were being harmed by the VOC emissions?
- How would you justify your decision?
Trending now
This is a popular solution!
Step by step
Solved in 3 steps
