Matchless clothing company sourced products from Nantra, which employed child labor in poor conditions. When a political organization discovered this connection and planned to make it public, Matchless preemptively released the information itself and announced it was ending the relationship with Nantra. Matchless publicized this in advertising and saw increased sales and profits as a result. From an ethical perspective, Matchless's conduct was not unethical as it took action to end the use of child labor in its supply chain and was transparent about its decision, even if profits factored into the motivation.

1. Mathchless clothing company buys clothing assembled by nantra, LTD.,a foreign firm that
employs young childern for long hours and low pay. Nantra's nation does not enforce it;s child
labor laws. Human international Politics (HIP), a political activist organization , discovers
Matchless's connection to Nantra and plans to reveal this information. Before HIP does
so,however , mathcless publicly releases the information itseld and announces that it is serverin
its relationship with Nantra. Matchless publicizes its action in its avertising, and it's company's
sales and profits increse, apparent;y as direct result. Has matchless acted unethically in any way
? Frin an ethical prespective, is matchless's conduct in this situation more important than
whatever it's moive might be ?
Solution
Solution :::
Mathchless Clothes has not acted unethically in publicly releasing the information itself or in
severing its relationship with nantra.Ethical behavior can sometimes generate sufficient good
will to warrant practicing it out of a desire for increased profits. By the same token,unethical
behavior can sometimes generate enough bad publicity to warrant avoiding it out of the same
desire. A business firm