Don Mayer

Ethics and the gender equality dilemma for U.s. Multinationals

U.S. multinational enterprises must now follow the policies of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 in their overseas operations, at least with respect to U.S. expatriate employees. Doing so in a culture which discourages gender equality in the workplace raises difficult issues, both practically and ethically. Vigorously importing U.S. attitudes toward gender-equality into a social culture such as Japan or Saudi Arabia may seem “ethnocentric,” a version of “ethical imperialism.” Yet adapting to host country norms risks a kind of “moral relativism.” This article supports the view that MNEs which promote workplace equality in a host country such as Japan, which is actively involved in the international economic and political community, is not “ethical imperialism” in any pejorative sense and is preferable to a moral relativism or social contract approach.We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal, and endowed by their creator with certain rights — life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.U.S. Declaration of Independence, 1776 All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948

Sovereign Immunity and the Moral Community

A6stract: Government policies and practices can exert significant influence on ethical behavior in a society. Many governments still rely on a long-standing prerogative of sovereigns, the defense of sovereign immunity, to avoid public inquiry about acts that are clearly immoral. However, the basic theory and frequent practice of invoking sovereign immunity cannot be ethically justified. Moreover, such practices model conduct based on power rather than reason, fairness, or justice, and invite both nations and individuals to view politics and business as a power game to be played and won, rather than as a process of building communities that emphasize reciprocity and commitment to moral principles.