The Ethics of Corporations

10.00-10.15: welcome and introductions  

10.15-11.15: Daniel Halliday - "Workplace Hierarchy and the Employment Relationship" 
The hierarchical character of the employment relationship is often blamed for some major and persistent labour market injustices, most notably those associated with the ability of employers or bosses to dominate workers. Nonetheless, there is a case for being more optimistic about the employment relationship than is customary in political philosophy. As a preliminary matter, employment should be kept more sharply distinct from group-based hierarchies that have a more robustly oppressive character, such as hierarchies of race, gender, and class. In contrast to properly social hierarchies, troubling features of the employment relationship are likely to be contingent even if common. Viewing employment as distinctive among hierarchies makes it easier to identify some positive features of employment, which proposals for reform might seek to elevate. In addition, some of the ‘bads’ of employment might in fact be traceable to ways in which hierarchy is being reduced due to some ongoing trends and reforms. While none of this is meant to downplay the severity of real-world injustices in labour markets, viewing these as contingent rather than constitutive of employment helps to differentiate among some competing proposals about how to advance justice for workers.

11.15-11.30: morning tea  

11.30-12.30: Stephanie Collins - "Corporate Obligations Under Structural Injustice"
A structural injustice occurs when social, economic, or political processes produce unjust outcomes, where those processes cannot be reduced to identifiable wrongs perpetrated by isolatable agents (whether individual or collective). In circumstances of structural injustice, responsibility can seem to slip through our fingers. This paper briefly outlines a care-ethical approach to responsibility under structural injustice, before exploring the implications of that approach for business corporations. In brief, the approach suggests that corporations should focus their justice-promoting actions on their specific industry and value-chain—rather than intervening directly in distant parts of the social system that are not part of the corporation’s core business. 

12.30-1.30: lunch  

1.30-2.30: Michael Eigner - "The Moral Cost of Work: Ethical Conflicts as Corporate Externalities" 
Moral harm arising from ethical conflict at work constitutes a neglected externality in corporate life. While some states recognize religious exemptions for employees who object to certain tasks, comparable consideration for non-religious moral convictions is largely absent. As a result, the moral costs of production are displaced onto individuals rather than internalized by firms. I argue that corporations have a responsibility to account for these ethical externalities. One potential way to do so is through morally accommodating individuals, particularly when the burden on the firm is minimal and the employee’s convictions are sincerely held. Addressing such moral harms not only enhances corporate legitimacy but also yields instrumental benefits for individuals, organizations, and society.

2.30-3: afternoon tea  

3-4: Joanna Kyriakakis - "Australian Negligence Based Climate Litigation and the Question of Corporate Culpability"  
To date there have been two major tort based climate cases in Australia: Sharma v the Minister for the Environment and Pabai v the Commonwealth. Both cases were representative actions brought against the Federal Government under the tort of negligence regarding alleged failures to act with reasonable care in respect of risks of harms associated with climate change. Unlike other countries, Australia has yet to see a negligence based climate litigation brought against a corporation. However, there are indicators within the Australian cases dealing with state tortious liability for climate harms as to what questions might arise should such a claim, along the lines seen elsewhere, be attempted. In this presentation I will explore the decisions in Sharma and Pabai to reflect on what they portend regarding the tortious obligations of Australian corporations for climate harms. 

4-5: Duncan Wallace - "A Corporation's Members: In Law and Metaphysics"  
Who are a corporation’s members? This is an important question for issues like corporate acts, corporate responsibility, and corporate rights. In this talk I will discuss, first, who the law understands as a corporation’s members, as well as some of the history of how the law came to its current position. I will discuss, second, metaphysical approaches to corporate membership, focussing in particular on a critical engagement with Stephanie Collin’s approach in Organizations as Wrongdoers. Finally, I will compare legal and metaphysical approaches. The ultimate purpose of this discussion is to come to a conclusion on whether shareholders can be understood as a corporation’s members, or whether they ought, instead, to be understood as something else.