Recall and Closure: The Apple Juice Company Case Study

Recall and Closure

Benitez claims that a recall is tantamount to closing down the company. However, avoiding this recall is not a risk worth taking. The claims made by Benitez are only meant to protect the firm. The administrator is not concerned about what the company offers to the public. On the contrary, his worries are more about the money. A cost-benefit analysis of the program will ensure that the company gets more revenue from the sale of the juice.

However, it may affect the health of consumers. It is important to note that cost-benefit analysis will not help the company maximize its profits. As explained in the case study, the company is still making losses even after a change in the management team. The money made from the sale can only sustain a portion of its activities. It will be better if the recall was made and the company shut down to allow time to improve its services.

The Apple Juice company is not of any benefit to the community. Benitez’s claims are not reasonable. Initially, the company’s name had been tarnished by the allegations that it was distributing substandard products. To regain the confidence of the consumers, the firm should shut down its operations for some time and re-open as a new entity. Avoiding the recall is not worth the risk. Instead, the management should embrace this opportunity to rebrand the entity. Without a recall, the business will continue to incur losses. The arguments made by Benitez focus on the firm’s operations. The administrator is ignoring the entity’s obligation to corporate social responsibility. In the long-run, the company will eventually be forced to close down.

Violation of Public Trust

A number of allegations were made by prosecutors against Dare. For example, the entity breached the trust of its consumers. It did this by failing to provide high-quality formulae for babies. Dare is supposed to protect the public from any harm that may be brought about by the consumption of the juice. However, lawyers are opposed to this. They claim that it will be acceptable if it is labeled properly. Improper labeling is one of the ways through which the company violated the trust of the people. It was not a mistake made in packaging. On the contrary, it was a scheme that was well known even by the public.

Poor quality does not always mean that a given product is going to harm the public. A good example is a water, which cannot be compared to apple juice. Consumers expect apple juice to be more nutritious. It should also contain certain elements missing in the water. The conflicts arising, in this case, involve the fact that the company failed to create a nutritious apple juice drink. In this scenario, ‘non-nutritious’ means that the products used in making the drink are either substandard or of low quality. The benefits supposed to be enjoyed by consumers of a quality apple drink were missing in this case.

It is the main reason why the price of the drink was low compared to other products of the same caliber. It is possible that the product contains high concentrations of water, a situation that would dilute nutrients without making the product harmful. The conflict is not about price. It is about the quality of the product. The claims made to justify the failure to label properly are not sufficient. The company ‘owes a duty of care’ to ensure that the interests of the public are protected. Misrepresentation through labeling is another crime committed by the company.

Corporate Patriot

Benitez regards himself as a corporate patriot. He is doing what is expected of him as the president. However, the manner in which he conducts his activities does not portray the best qualities associated with a leader. The ‘corporate superior’ at Nestle did not expect that from him. Once a company is formed, it is supposed to respect the interests of the public and the consumers. The main reason is that public opinion may affect the performance of a company in the market. As the president, Benitez does not take into consideration the effects of some of the decisions made by the firm. The president is merely concerned with the affairs of the business. He is worried about how the company will make profits. He ignores the quality of products manufactured.

As the president and as one of the leaders in the company, Benitez is supposed to ensure that the business pays attention to corporate social responsibility. One of his duties is to make sure that the apple juice produced meets all the legal requirements. Apart from promoting the safety of the products, the president is also required to guarantee quality. Benitez is selfish and does not take into account the interests of other people.

Lowering the prices of the apple juice is not important, bearing in mind that the quality is low. A corporate leader is supposed to protect the company and all its interests in the present and in the future. Nestle’s corporate superior should have sacked Benitez due to his failure to honor his duties and responsibilities.

A Good Deal

‘A deal too good to be true’ is one of the rules involved in ethical decision-making processes. Ethical rules involve the laws and regulations that play a part in decision making. The phrase ‘a deal too good to be true’ was made in a judgment relating to the prices of the apple juice in question. The prices of the juice were significantly lower compared to those prevailing in the market. The situation raised suspicions that the quality of the juice may have been compromised. In most cases, low prices are associated with low-quality products. Consequently, the saying can be used as a rule in ethical decision making.

The reason is that most businesses are created with the aim of maximizing profits. Any business will want to compete with its rivals in the market perfectly. However, lowering prices to a critical point is not perfect competition. Most businesses use discounts in their marketing campaigns to attract customers. However, in Dare Company, the low prices are fixed. The firm did this deliberately and with the full knowledge that the quality of the juice was low.

As such, a deal too good to be true’ should be factored in when making decisions. A deal that is too good calls for critical analysis to establish the motive behind it. As such, one can avoid ‘bad’ bargains brought about by sole focus on such factors like price. Poor quality products usually come with low prices. That is the reason why the statement is regarded as an important ethical element that the public should take into consideration.

Responding to Derogatory Statements

When one brings a potential problem to the attention of the management, the expectation is that their efforts would be appreciated. However, at times, such persons may be labeled ‘naive’ and ‘idealistic.’ A typical reaction to this will be short and precise. A naive person lacks experience. On its part, idealism illustrates the pursuit of perfection. When the two words are used on someone, they should understand that it is not an exact description of their characteristics. The management may fail to take appreciate the gravity of the problem presented. However, as an employee, it is the duty of the individual to deal with it.

The primary role of an employee to ensure that the problem is dealt with before it causes harm. Some issues may affect the workers only. As such, the management can afford to ignore it. However, the same problems may jeopardize the wellbeing of the larger society. It may also threaten the existence of the business. For this reason, all employees are trained to face and solve a wide range of problems. In the absence of management, employees should be able to run the business smoothly. If the management disregards an impending danger, the workers should not give up. On the contrary, they should deal with the problem at the employee level.

In most cases, business entities fail to honor their obligations by allowing certain people to take control of all their operations. In the case of Dare’s Apple Juice, the president failed to play his role. On their part, junior employees may have contributed to the failure of the organization by condoning malpractices. Every problem has a solution if tackled in the right way. Superiors who call employees names like ‘naive’ only discourage them from carrying out their duties. However, employees should never be discouraged. They should always play their roles.