Volkswagen Emission Scandal: Defending Arguments vs. Business Ethics

Possible defending reasons for Volkswagen in the emission scandal:

1. The company was under pressure to meet strict emission regulations and had to find a way to comply without sacrificing performance or fuel efficiency.
2. The engineers responsible for the emissions software believed they were acting in the best interest of the company and did not intend to deceive regulators or customers.
3. The emissions cheating was not widespread and only affected a small portion of the company's vehicles.
4. The company has taken responsibility for the scandal and is implementing measures to prevent similar incidents from happening in the future.
5. The emissions software was not explicitly illegal and was used by other automakers as well.
6. The company's actions were a result of a competitive market that incentivizes cutting corners to gain an edge.
7. The company's profits were not significantly impacted by the scandal and therefore, the harm caused was minimal.
8. The company has provided compensation and remedies to affected customers and has worked to restore their trust.
9. The company's actions were not solely responsible for environmental harm and other industries also contribute to air pollution.
10. The company's leaders were not aware of the emissions cheating and therefore, cannot be held fully accountable for the actions of a few employees.

Rejecting the 10 reasons from the perspective of Business Ethics:

1. Although meeting regulations is important, it does not justify cheating and deceiving regulators and customers.
2. The intention of the engineers does not negate the harm caused by the emissions cheating and the company's responsibility to act ethically.
3. The scale of the emissions cheating does not excuse the violation of ethical principles and harm caused to the environment and public health.
4. While taking responsibility is important, it does not absolve the company of its wrongdoing and the need to make amends.
5. The fact that other automakers may have also used the emissions software does not justify the company's actions and the harm caused.
6. Competition does not justify unethical behavior and companies have a responsibility to prioritize ethics over profits.
7. The fact that profits were not significantly impacted does not mean that the harm caused was minimal and does not negate the need for accountability.
8. While providing compensation and remedies is important, it does not erase the harm caused and the need for the company to take responsibility for its actions.
9. Other industries contributing to air pollution does not excuse the company's actions and the harm caused by its emissions cheating.
10. The leaders of the company have a responsibility to ensure ethical behavior throughout the organization and cannot absolve themselves of accountability for the actions of their employees.