· Part I: Key Case Summary This case discusses the Union Carbide gas leak that occurred in Bhopal, India in 1984. Over five thousand people were killed and hundreds of thousands were injured after water inadvertently mixed with methyl isocyanate (MIC) causing the release of a deadly gas. The plant in Bhopal was a pesticide production facility that served the increasing demand of India’s thriving farming industry. However, uncontrolled zoning allowed the plant to be built within close proximity to a densely populated region. While the plant was initially profitable, market changes negatively impacted revenue forcing budget cuts that led to the decay of maintenance and safety practices. There are several theories as to why the incident occurred such as a disgruntled employee’s maliciousness or an accidental contamination. Over several years, Union Carbide paid out hundreds of millions of dollars to the survivors and ultimately ceased to exist, while the community continues to struggle with the aftermath of the disaster. Main Critical Issues (the list): · India’s officials adopted careless zoning practices and allowed the construction of the plant near dense population. · The proper safety procedures were not followed and the equipment was not being properly utilized as designed. UCIL managers placed a higher weight on cost cutting than on safety, resulting in the reduction of maintenance and safety practices. · Union Carbide Corp. did not require frequent reporting from its subsidiary in India (UCIL), which allowed malpractices and unsafe systems in the Bhopal plant to go unnoticed. · Union Carbide Corporation and UCIL had an ethical obligation to warn the surrounding community of potential dangers of living close to the pesticide plant · If the case, the disgruntled employees action to sabotage the plant to take vengeance · Employees and supervisors in the Bhopal plant did not follow numerous policies and routines that could have prevented the tragedy (e.g. acting upon the alarming increase in the tank pressure, instead of postponing it to after the tea break). · The residents were not informed of what actions to take in the event of a toxic leak or accident. · The employees did not use the emergency buses to evacuate surrounding residents. · Part II: Key Stakeholders: The following are the stakeholders in the case:  The Union Carbide’s Corporation Stockholders, The Bhopal’s population, The Indian Government, The Bombay Stock Exchange, The Union Carbide’s workers from de Indian subsidiary “UCIL”. The workers from Union Carbide headquarter in Connecticut, The Board of Directors of Union Carbide Headquarter, and The Board of Directors from Union Carbide’s Indian subsidiary. The American and Indian lawyers. UCIL’s Executives. Carbides’ Scientifics. Indian Scientists and engineers. Indian Court Systems. Insurance company. Indian Public. Corrupts Physicians. Corrupts Court Officials. Bhopal Congress. Chemical Industry. Dow Chemical. The Activis.

1. · Part I: Key
Case Summary
This case discusses the Union Carbide gas leak that occurred in
Bhopal, India in 1984. Over five thousand people were killed
and hundreds of thousands were injured after
water inadvertently mixed with methyl isocyanate (MIC)
causing the release of a deadly gas. The plant in Bhopal was a
pesticide production facility that served the increasing demand
of India’s thriving farming industry. However, uncontrolled
zoning allowed the plant to be built within close proximity to a
densely populated region. While the plant was initially
profitable, market changes negatively impacted revenue forcing
budget cuts that led to the decay of maintenance and safety
practices. There are several theories as to why the incident
occurred such as a disgruntled employee’s maliciousness or
an accidental contamination. Over several years, Union Carbide
paid out hundreds of millions of dollars to the survivors and
ultimately ceased to exist, while the community continues to
struggle with the aftermath of the disaster.
Main Critical Issues (the list):
· India’s officials adopted careless zoning practices and allowed
the construction of the plant near dense population.
· The proper safety procedures were not followed and the
equipment was not being properly utilized as designed. UCIL
managers placed a higher weight on cost cutting than on safety,
resulting in the reduction of maintenance and safety practices.
· Union Carbide Corp. did not require frequent reporting from
its subsidiary in India (UCIL), which allowed malpractices and
unsafe systems in the Bhopal plant to go unnoticed.
· Union Carbide Corporation and UCIL had an ethical
obligation to warn the surrounding community of potential
dangers of living close to the pesticide plant
· If the case, the disgruntled employees action to sabotage the

2. plant to take vengeance
· Employees and supervisors in the Bhopal plant did not follow
numerous policies and routines that could have prevented the
tragedy (e.g. acting upon the alarming increase in the tank
pressure, instead of postponing it to after the tea break).
· The residents were not informed of what actions to take in the
event of a toxic leak or accident.
· The employees did not use the emergency buses to evacuate
surrounding residents.
·
Part II: Key
Stakeholders:
The following are the stakeholders in the case: The Union
Carbide’s Corporation Stockholders, The Bhopal’s population,
The Indian Government, The Bombay Stock Exchange, The
Union Carbide’s workers from de Indian subsidiary “UCIL”.
The workers from Union Carbide headquarter in Connecticut,
The Board of Directors of Union Carbide Headquarter, and The
Board of Directors from Union Carbide’s Indian subsidiary. The
American and Indian lawyers. UCIL’s Executives. Carbides’
Scientifics. Indian Scientists and engineers. Indian Court
Systems. Insurance company. Indian Public. Corrupts
Physicians. Corrupts Court Officials. Bhopal Congress.
Chemical Industry. Dow Chemical. The Activists Movements.
Progressive religious order, Pension funds. Dow Chemical
Stockholders. The world population.
· The Union Carbides’ Corporation Stockholders were affected
for this situation because the legal battle against the people
involved in the accident, and the bad publicity generated by the
case, decreased the value of the stock significantly.
· The stockholders had the power to remove the Board of
Directors when a company is acting unethically. The Bhopal’s
population lost thousands of people due to the accident, and an
important amount of survivors had suffered from health
problems, that range from moderate to permanent incapacity. It
is claimed that the victims were not properly compensated for

3. the damages suffered, which seems to be a negligent ethical
behavior.
· The Indian Government had a loss of popularity because it was
thought to have some kind of responsibility in the tragedy. Its
Nationalistic policies pushed a process that neglected some
important procedures to keep the companies operating on high
standards of safeness.
· The Bombay Stock Exchange operations were affected because
Union Carbides was one of the most important companies in the
market, by the moment of the tragedy. It must had experimented
important economical loses.
· The Union Carbide’s workers from the Indian subsidiary lost
their jobs, and were psychologically affected because of the
whole situation. The workers from the Union Carbide’s
headquarter in Connecticut, and the workers from Carbide’s
worldwide, progressively lost their jobs due to the company’s
declining.
· The Board of Directors from Union Carbide Headquarter, and
Union Carbide’s Indian subsidiary had a loss of reputation
because of lack company direction. The American and Indian
Lawyer had their interest affected because of changes of
jurisdictions.
· UCIL’s Executives and Supervisors were blamed by the
tragedy, facing Courts trials, legal demands, and loss of
reputation. Their behavior was negligent, misapplying
standardized procedures to keep a safe and secure place.
· Carbides’ Scientifics, and Indian Scientifics and Engineers
generated different conclusions about the accident’s causes. The
accident’s causes is still uncertain, so their work is also under
ethics considerations.
· Indian Courts System were affected adversely by the public
opinion because the poor resolutions about the cases. There is
general appreciation than the victims’ rights to be properly
compensated were violated. Court officials and Indian
Physicians had a loss of reputation due to the abundant
corruption cases. Bhopal Congress and US Congress had to pass

4. laws to regulate the industrial activity in order to prevent this
kind of tragedies.
· The Chemical Industry was affected forever after this
accident. It had to develop safety processes to prevent
accidents. Dow chemical, bought The Union Carbide and is the
object of demands for victims of the tragedies and other groups
of interest. The Activists Movements, Progressive religious
orders, and Pension Funds are highly active generating actions
against Dow Chemical, on behalf of some of the tragedy
victims.
· The interest of Dow Chemical Stockholders are being affected.
Dow Chemical had paid important amounts of money as a direct
consequence of the tragedy, and is constantly harassed for
activist groups, however, exist a public perception that the
victims deserve more. The Union’s Carbide Corporate
executives were also blamed, sued, and even imprisoned
because of their supposed negligent to keep an appropriated
control over the Indian Plant of Bhopal. It could be considered
an unethical behavior, not to care or supervise the operations to
avoid safety issues in such a risky industry. They have been
accused of putting cost reduction over safeness and Security.
Ethical Theories and Principles:
· The Disclosure Rule: How would you feel explaining your
actions to a wider audience such as a newspaper readers,
television viewers, or your family? If you feel not good doing
such explanations is because something must be wrong. The
public confrontation would make you to think a little deeper
about the action and probably you will end doing the right
thing. For example: The Union Carbide Headquarters’ decision
makers could have used these rule before making the decision to
neglect security in favor of profitability. This decision
conducted them to decrease the personnel and the programs to
maintain highly security standards.
· If the decision makers had seen themselves explaining such a
risky decision to a wider audience, maybe they had not

5. neglected the Bhopal’s plant security. The same analysis could
be applied to the fact of the victims’ compensations. Why to
pay unfear compensations to people who lose their capacity to
work? What would we think a wider audience about this
decision? This analysis would be also applicable to the
“supposed disgruntled worker” before deciding his sabotage
actions. Either way the government of India before allowing to
set a plant in a highly populated area.
· The Golden Rule: Do unto others what you would have them
do unto you. Would you like to work in a place with a high risk
of having a fatal accident? Probably your answer would be no.
So, why you will expose others to such situation? That is what
Union Carbide’s decision makers and the Indian authorities did.
They both allowed the functioning of an insecure and risky
place work.
· The Intuition Ethic: What is good or right is understood by an
inner moral sense based on character and felt as intuition. There
were several versions about what caused the accident.
According to the case, it is not completely clear what the cause
of the accident was. However, if the cause was neglecting the
security or a disgruntled worker, both cases could have been
avoided if the responsible for either action had had a good
character. A character good enough to intuit that neglecting the
security, or a deliberated sabotage were wrong actions.
· Might-Equals-Right-Ethic: The justice is in the interest of the
stronger. The stronger, must be the first interested in justice
according to this principle. If Unions Carbide and the Indian
Government had followed this principle, both of it had procured
a fear compensation to the victims.
· The Organization Ethic: Be loyal to the organization. For
example: If a disgruntled worker caused the accident, it could
have been avoided if the worker had had loyalty for the
organization. Either way could happen with the company
decision makers.
· The Proportionality Ethic: A set of rules for making decisions
having both good and evil consequences: For example: If the

6. disgruntled worker was the responsible, he could have avoided
his actions by considering the evil consequences of the action.
In the case of Union Carbide and The Indian government, if
they had considered the evil consequences of neglecting
security, the tragedy could have been avoided also.
· The Right Ethic: Each person has protection and entitlements
that others have a duty to respect. This is applicable to the right
of the victims to be properly compensated. So, Dow Chemical
decisions makers, and the legislators in India and US, should
have it into consideration with the victims’ demands that could
be evaluated as fear.
· The Theory of Justice: Each person should act fairly toward
others in order to maintain the bonds of community. For
example: Union Carbide in the past, Dow chemical and The
Indian Government nowadays, should act fairly to compensate
the victims that were not properly compensated. Also, the Union
Carbide and The Indian Government should have recognized its
responsibilities in the past in order maintain the bonds of the
communities.