CASE STUDY: 1999 Cherry Hills Subdivision Landslide

1. How is the triple bottom line violated by this tragedy? Explain

To ensure everyone's safety, every firm must adhere to specific requirements. Everything, regardless of
its type or brand name, must pass the government's supplied measurement. In the instance of the
Cherry Hill subdivision, I believe TBL was broken not just by the firm but also by the government.
Primarily because, as a government agency, they are responsible for enforcing a specific legislation that
requires every company establishment, particularly those in the housing industry, such as the Philjas
Corporation, to demonstrate complete compliance with everyone's health and safety. On the other
hand, Philjas is the one who made a clear error here.To protect everyone's safety, each company must
follow certain guidelines. Everything, regardless of kind or brand name, must pass the government-
provided test. In the case of the Cherry Hill development, I believe TBL was violated by both the
company and the government. Because, as a government organization, they are in charge of
implementing specific regulations that compels every corporate establishment, notably those in the
housing industry, such as the Philjas Corporation, to demonstrate total compliance with everyone's
health and safety. Philjas, on the other hand, made a clear mistake here.

2.Are there malpractices in business ethics in this case? How could CSR been practiced to have avoided
this problem? Explain

Developers claim that the usually huge volume of water that seeped into Hill 255, where Cherry Hills
was located, caused enough pressure that triggered the subdivision’s collapse. But geologist based on
the University of the Philippines argue that while heavy rains may have set off disaster, they claim that
certain geological characteristics of the area made the subdivision vulnerable to landslide. The rains
could not have been the sole factor behind the tragedy, they add. Geological survey been done before
the house built, the disaster could have been avoided, according to UP geologists. The study would have
determined the presence of fissures, the composition of the soil and rocks in the area, their reaction to
seismic and other potential disturbances. The developers would have been advised to adjust their
construction plan to prevent a disaster.

3.What CSR view could have been used in this case so that the event had not happened? Defend your
answer.

Corporate Social Responsibility is an ethical theory in which corporate are accountable for fulfilling
their duty and the action of corporations must benefit the whole of society. In this way, there must be a
balance between economic growth and the welfare of society and the environment. In this case, Philjas
Corporation failed to do their duty, although and convergence of these seemingly unrelated and
unfortunate events, more like a twin disaster of climate was responsible for the landslide, Philjap.
Corporation ignore and misread the warning sign were there five years before the tragedy occured,
hairline fissures on the walls and pavements of the subdivision. And I think, if the Philjas Corporation
had conducted a thorough investigation into the hazardous environment and had closely monitored the
development of their subdivision, the risk of landslides would have been reduced and no additional
fatalities would have resulted. These actions would have been in line with the CSR perspective and could
have prevented the incident from occurring.

4. What responsibilities should have been applied in this case to have prevented the tragedy? How
about after the tragedy? Discuss

Ethical duty is the exact CSR attitude that Philjas should use to mitigate or avert the catastrophe. This
viewpoint is concerned with the ability to perceive, interpret, and act on multiple principles and values
based on norms within a certain sector and/or setting. There are many factors that should be addressed
before and after the construction of a building in the construction sector, such as the positioning and
location of the house and having a drainage system, but Philjas failed to comply with it. If they only
understood the necessity of proper water drainage, they could prevent landslides and no one would
have to mourn over the loss of a loved one. In the months that follow of that disaster Philjas can
exercise philanthropic duty, where the feeling of belonging to the community serves as the primary
foundation. Because such an experience is extremely painful, the corporation may establish a livelihood
program for the victims, allowing them to start their own businesses and providing them with
counseling.