Response 1: E. Hill: Lehman Brothers was one of the biggest investment banks in the United States for many years. They had billion in assets and seemed like they could do no wrong. However in 2008 Lehman Brothers filed for bankruptcy amid reports of scandal within the company. Previously to the collapse Lehman Brothers, they had purchased mortgage lenders including a couple of subprime lenders. This was the start of the downfall. These subprime lenders offered loans to people who were not credit worthy and did not have to provide full documentation for the loan. In the next few years cracks developed in the housing market and the rest is history. This all primarily happened because of the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act. This act separated the interests of commercial and investment banks thus protecting and preventing each from competing against each other. Without this act, it became a free for all in the banking industry, The bank did not live up to its moral ethical structure as they should have; they lied to everyone and misreported their finances prior to the eventuality of filing for bankruptcy. Financial companies in the United States had long thought they were not susceptible to the laws and ethical standards that others are. With the fall of Lehman brothers it showed that regardless of how profitable they are, being unethical and immoral will not be allowed as a standard here in this country. There were three main ethical reasons why Lehman Brothers failed and filed for bankruptcy. 1. The strategy that Lehman Brothers had during that time was aggressive and although there were signs of a housing collapse in the horizon, they did not change their strategy or do anything to help the possible prevention of the disaster that was unfolding. 2. The creations of fake companies were intended to misrepresent the actual financial health of the company. It was also intended to basically lie to shareholders into thinking that everything is ok. It was so bad that Lehman did this in consecutive quarters. 3. Ernst & Young was the only company that knew what was going on internally at Lehman Brothers, but the failed to report what was actually going on internally. All these reasons caused the downfall of Lehman Brothers and definitely hurt all companies involved with this. There was simply no ethics that mattered to these companies at that time. They only cared about the bottom line was telling them. They were and are morally corrupt and deceitful and still can’t be trusted in my opinion. The company higher ups only cared about themselves and saving their butt’s instead of caring about the thousands of people that work for them and the money that people invested in the company. Unfortunately, I don’t believe enough was done to hold those accountable back in 2008 and I really believe that they got off easy. There has to be stronger punishments for people who think they are above the system and for those that cause has to the entire financial system in the U.S. Www.nytimes.com Www.investopedia.com Response 2 B. Graham: Over the years in American history, there have been years and tears of gender discrimination, and when and when women joined the workforce, these practices continued to carry on. In this country, there has always been a division of the genders throughout history. Women have sought to be looked at and treated as equals in the very society that they live and thrive in. In the case of Lilly Ledbetter vs. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., (2006) this issue was very prominent and was a matter of unethical business behavior. While companies such as Goodyear are in a capitalist economy and private business, allowing companies to treat their employees in such a manner is unethical because if one is required to do the same work, then one should get the same pay. It also keeps the wage gap been men and women distant while giving companies the idea that they are allowed to treat its employees unfairly while not having to abide by the law, such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Lilly Ledbetter was hired in 1979 as a supervisor in the Goodyear tire plant in Alabama, and over the years was denied merit raises due to her performance evaluation which resulted in her pension to be less than her male co-workers in the end. She noticed little things throughout her career but never realized how these little things really made an impact on her life. Working in the male-dominated field, Lilly took many things with a grain of salt because she did not have all the evidence necessary to build a case prior to her retirement. After retirement, Lilly, (2006) took all the information she gained, some of which was anonymous; she decided to take her case to court for her gender pay discrimination in the workforce at the end of her career with Goodyear. Lilly took her case to civil court where she won was awarded her back pay as well as punitive damages for the time spent working there. Goodyear then appealed the decision and went to the Supreme Court and they decided her settlement was not valid and reversed the decision because it was outside of a 180-day statute of limitation (Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. 500 U.S. 618, 2006, para. 8). Bader. H. (2013). Misconceptions about Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. Engage, 13(3), 26-30. Retrieved from http://www.fed-soc.org/publications/detail/misconceptions-about-ledbetter-vgoodyear-tire-rubber-co Fieser, J. (2015). Introduction to business ethics [Electronic version]. Retrieved from https://content.ashford.edu/ Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. 550 U.S. 618 (2006). Retrieved from https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/051074.ZO.html
Purchase answer to see full attachment