Name: Lupita Ardhyaningrum
Student Number: 100807173
BUSI 4705 Business Ethics
Canada’s Asbestos Industry and Its Underlying Ethical Issues
Individuals, corporations, organizations, and government, continuously make
choices that can be judged under ethical standards. Various choices that are made can
either be ethical or unethical due to many factors. The case study of Jeffery Mine is a
depiction of how correlated stakeholders’ ambitious self-interests can conflict with
societies’ ethical principles and morality. This paper will focus on the underlying issue of
the case and set of actions that should be taken by each stakeholder. The action plan is
intended to address the main ethical disagreements in the case.
As it has already been stated in the case study, the provincial government of
Quebec had proposed to loan the Asbestos mining company, Jeffery Mine for $58 million
dollars to revive the dying industry of Asbestos. The government believed that the loan
will help create new employments for the population in that area and that Asbestos will
pose no danger to human if it’s properly used and well taken care of. In addition to that,
federal government defends the idea that Canadian industry should be protected.
The problem of the case study is that, whether or not it is ethical and morally
acceptable to export an illegal and hazardous mineral that —in the long term—can trigger
asbestos related diseases such as lung cancer to developing countries that have not yet
banned the use of Asbestos.
From my personal point of view, I think it is indeed unethical for the Canadian
government to provide the $58 million loan to rebuild the Asbestos mining industry. The
solution to this ethical problem is to cancel out the loan of $58 million dollar for Jeffery
Mine. Therefore I have created an all-things-considered best action plan for the four major stakeholders. The Asbestos mining company, Jeffery Mine (including the senior
executives and the shareholders) should do the following: a) First off, the company needs
to reevaluate and reassess the costs and benefits of conducting business in this industry.
What are the chances that the business will likely to succeed considering the fact that it
has to deal with recognized hazardous minerals in which countries worldwide ban the use
of it? In the past the company has filed bankruptcy there I believe that Jeffery Mine
should not make the same mistake twice. It is best for the company to put an end to the
Asbestos industry. b) Instead, with the connections they already have in developing
countries, Jeffery Mine should look for better alternatives such as start investing in
another potential industry that does not involve with exporting dubious/illegal substances.
c) The company executives and shareholders should understand how social corporate
responsibility is crucial to the survival of businesses. Jeffery mine should realize that it
might make profit in the short run, however in the long run they will have to face the
consequences for disregarding the fact that asbestos is harmful. They might have to tackle
issues that pertain to the asbestosis diseases such as legal measures taken by victims.
Growing recognition of having good ethics can have a positive economic impact on the
performance of companies and vice versa.
The main obstacles to be encountered would be the corporate executives
neglecting and not cooperating to the best alternative solutions provided. It is very likely
that they will uphold what they consider is right and remain pursing their self-interests.
The worse scenario, they will propose another loan in the future. To overcome these
obstacles, Government should interfere by providing new policies and rules to put an end for the Asbestos industry. That way, Jeffery Mine will be able to diversify the company’s
The second stakeholder in this case would be the provincial and federal
government of Canada. An action plan for them would be: a) politics should not win over
principles and ethics therefore they should cancel out the loan to reopen the asbestos
mine. It is mainly because Canada carries a moral obligation to close down this ind