View
157
Download
3
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
CORE PROBLEM OF CASE
UNETHICAL ISSUES RELATED TO BREAST-FEEDING
REGULATIONS
in India and in many other countries, aggressive marketing of breast milk
substitutes by commercial interests triggered campaigns for promotion of
commercial interests triggered campaigns for promotion of breast –
feeding. the promotion of breast milk substitutes by medical professionals
challenged traditional breast feeding practices. The baby food industry
very cleverly sought to promote its products through health-care facilities.
in India , in wake of global developments with regard to the promotion of
breast-feeding, the infant milk foods and feeding bottles bill was passed in
the Lok Sabha in 1989. In 1992, the ‘infant milk substitutes, feeding bottles
and infant foods (Regulation of Production, Supply and Distribution) act’
was finally passed. It came into force from 1 August 1993. The Act
expressly prohibits:
distribution of free samples of infant milk foods and feeding bottles to
mothers;
advertising to public;
promotion in health care facilities;
distribution of gifts or samples to health workers;
promotion of words and pictures that idealize bottle feeding;
advice to mothers by company sales staff;
financial assistance to health organizations or associations of doctors to
organize conferences, seminars, and so on; and
Incentives to sales personnel/ retailers based on volume of sales.
And Indian govt. has authorized four voluntary organizations to monitor
the Act. These are the Central Social Welfare Board, the Indian Council
for Child Welfare, the Association for Commerce for Consumers Action
on Safety and Health .and Breast-feeding Promotion Network of India
(BPNI).
However, Wockhardt ltd, in spite of the 1992 regulation went on to
distribute free samples, according to the study conducted by
UNICEFACASH. The study revealed that the incidence of free samples
prevailed all over India- it was highest in the country’s capital, New Delhi.
Seventy two percent of the free samples were given by Nestle, twenty four
percent Dalmia Dairy, 19% Wockhardt and 18% by Raptokos Brett,
VICTIMAZATION OF EMPLOYEES
ON 8 May 2003 more than 75000 medical representatives from all over
India participated in a 50-day relay strike in Kerala under the aegis of the
Federation of Medical and Sales Representatives Associations of India
(FMRAI) protesting against the unethical policies of pharmaceutical
companies which (1) denied the fundamental trade union rights of the
members; (2) pursued policies that treated sales promotion employees as
vendible commodities and resorted to ‘hire and fire’ and (3) increased the
work-load on employees.
However, it was found that Wockhardt Ltd has dismissed more than
77 medical representatives because of declining sales. it had also affected
large number of transfers of sales promotion employees for the same
reason.
The Wockhardt management with a view to pre-empting the strike , issued
an office order on 6 February 2003. It made it known that the management
would not in any way have any truck with the FMRAI’s call by an employee
would be considered an undisciplined act and appropriate action would be
taken against such employee.
LACK OF SECURITY OF SERVICE TO WORKERS
Wockhardt Ltd has been increasingly pressing the employees, particularly
the field workers. On the one hand, field workers are being thrown out of
regular employment with impunity while, on the other hand, casualization
of field workers is on the rise, accompanied by low wages as well as poor
working and service conditions.
UNETHICAL SALES PRACTICES
Apart from indulging in violation of basic trade union rights of employees,
Wockhardt management also victimized the company’s field workers, who
had to face medical practitioners, traders and the general public, when the
company resorted to several unethical trade practices. In this regard
FMRAI wrote a letter to the company chairman and requested his personal
attention in the matter of unfair sales and marketing practices indulged by
the management. But the management resorted to derecognition of the
union.
PROMOTING HEALTH CARE SYSTEM THROUGH
IMPROPERLY LABELLED SAMPLES
Infant food samples should conform to labeling requirements and every
infant food should comply with section 6 and rule 7 and 8 of the 1992 Act.
However Wockhardt distributes free samples of ‘Dexrice’ to doctors
promoting it as delicious weaning food with enriched vitamins. Even
though free samples of infant foods are permitted by law, samples packs of
Dexrice, an infant food from Wockhardt do not conform to labeling
requirements.
HARASSING COMPETITORS IN MATTERS OF
CLINICAL TRIALS
A ‘non-existent’ NGO linked to a senior Wockhardt executive attempted to
use the public interest litigation route in the Supreme Court to derail the
launch of insulin by its rival, Biocon, and has focused the public’s attention
on the business of clinical trials.
ANALYSIS AND INFERENCES
After identifying the problem we analyzed that Wockhardt Ltd have
involved itself in so many unethical practices. However they very well
familiar with the ‘Infant Milk Substitutes, Feeding Bottles and Infant Foods
(regulation of Production, Supply and Distribution) Act’, they distributed
free samples. They should stop this. They have refused to recognize the
employee association. They refused to accept the rights of employees for
‘freedom of association’. It is fundamental right of any one to make the
association, union.
RECOMMENDATION
The Pharmaceutical Company should follow the rules regulation made by
govt. they should follow the business ethics. And what they are promising
to public stick on it. Company should follow Biotechnological,
environmental, social ethics. Here we have seen the difference between
precepts and practices of Wockhardt Ltd.
They should very clear in labeling, employee security, and social
responsibility.
CONCLUSION
The above instances of unethical practices by one of India’s leading
pharmaceutical companies Wockhardt, reveals the divergence that exists
between precepts and practices. Unethical companies tend to use code of
business conduct and ethics as a mask to show a humane face to the
outside world, while they adopt all kinds of unethical practices in their
workplace.
CRITICAL ANALYSIS
Here Wockhardt putted public, govt. and consumers in dark. They have
involved themselves in so many unethical businesses as like selling milk
products as a substitute of breast milk, victimization of employees, lack of
service security, unethical sales practices, promoting health care system
through improperly labeled samples and harassing competitors in matters
of clinical trials. Even though they have written in their business
philosophy, “Creating value by understanding and communicating with its
customers and business partners”, and in vision ‘To be the most admired
Indian Health Care Group. This type of things are unexpected by a leading
global and distinguish company.
Recommended