568 starnes Brenner
Michelle Young
MKT 568
Starnes-Brenner Machine Tool Company
1. Is what Frank did ethical? By whose ethics—those of Latino or the United States?
a. What frank did was unethical based on the United States standards of ethics. However, if it is part of Latino culture I can see why he would act unethically, so that he could conduct business. But, since the company is state owned company Frank should act accordingly to the ethical standards of the business set by the company.
2. Are Frank’s two different payments legal under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act as amended by the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988?
a. Neither of the payments Frank made were legal under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act as amended by the Omnbus Trade. Paying any form of bribe to a government official is not covered by the Act.
3. Identify the types of payments made in the case; that is, are they lubrication, extortion, or subornation?
a. The payments made by Frank were both lubrication. The payment made to the government official would be considered lubrication because, Frank made a small gift of money (which ended up being a large sum in the end) for what he thought would help expedite the process of getting the machine shipment fixed for the Latino standards. Paying the workers a small sum of money to help them work faster to transport the machines from one truck to another is lubrication as well, you are paying workers to expedite their work. What the jefe did to obtain the money from Frank could be considered extortion, since he used the threat of a time delay or refusing to accept the shipment in return for money.
4. Frank seemed to imply that there is a similarity between what he was doing and what happens in the United States. Is there any difference? Explain.
a. The implications Frank made that there are similarities between what he is doing and what happen in the United States. However, in the United States it is more commonly found that bribes of any form are
MKT 568
Starnes-Brenner Machine Tool Company
1. Is what Frank did ethical? By whose ethics—those of Latino or the United States?
a. What frank did was unethical based on the United States standards of ethics. However, if it is part of Latino culture I can see why he would act unethically, so that he could conduct business. But, since the company is state owned company Frank should act accordingly to the ethical standards of the business set by the company.
2. Are Frank’s two different payments legal under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act as amended by the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988?
a. Neither of the payments Frank made were legal under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act as amended by the Omnbus Trade. Paying any form of bribe to a government official is not covered by the Act.
3. Identify the types of payments made in the case; that is, are they lubrication, extortion, or subornation?
a. The payments made by Frank were both lubrication. The payment made to the government official would be considered lubrication because, Frank made a small gift of money (which ended up being a large sum in the end) for what he thought would help expedite the process of getting the machine shipment fixed for the Latino standards. Paying the workers a small sum of money to help them work faster to transport the machines from one truck to another is lubrication as well, you are paying workers to expedite their work. What the jefe did to obtain the money from Frank could be considered extortion, since he used the threat of a time delay or refusing to accept the shipment in return for money.
4. Frank seemed to imply that there is a similarity between what he was doing and what happens in the United States. Is there any difference? Explain.
a. The implications Frank made that there are similarities between what he is doing and what happen in the United States. However, in the United States it is more commonly found that bribes of any form are