Introduction This case highlights the conflict between profit maximization and ethical conduct in the workplace, specifically concerning sexual harassment. This dilemma mirrors the recent #MeToo movement, where individuals face immense pressure to remain silent, exemplified by cases like the allegations against Harvey Weinstein, showcasing the tension between personal morality and institutional duties, best addressed through a deontological lens focusing on the inherent rightness or wrongness of actions, regardless of consequences.

Stakeholder Identification The woman employee, the marketing executive, the company management, other employees, and the police/legal system.

Ethical Issues Involved:

• Sexual Harassment: This is a violation of fundamental rights and dignity, creating a hostile work environment.
• Lack of Justice/Values: The company's indifference and attempt to silence the victim demonstrate a lack of ethical values and disregard for justice.
• Collusion/Corruption: Offering money to withdraw the complaint is a form of bribery and perverts the course of justice.
• Conflict of Interest: The company's prioritization of profit over employee well-being represents a clear conflict of interest.
• Violation of Rights: The company's actions violate the woman's right to a safe workplace and access to justice.

Options Available to the Woman Employee:

1. Pursue Legal Action: Continue with the legal process initiated through the FIR, upholding her right to justice and setting a precedent for future cases. This aligns with the deontological approach, emphasizing the duty to pursue justice.
2. Seek Support from NGOs/Women's Rights Organizations: These organizations can provide legal aid, counseling, and advocacy, empowering her to navigate the legal system and cope with the emotional distress. This promotes the justice approach by ensuring fair treatment and support for the vulnerable.
3. Engage with Media/Public Awareness: Bringing the issue to public light can exert pressure on the company to act responsibly and create greater awareness about sexual harassment in the workplace. This embodies the utilitarian approach by aiming to maximize the good for the greatest number of people by preventing future occurrences.
4. Internal Complaint Mechanisms (if available): If the company has an internal complaints committee (as mandated by the POSH Act in India), she can pursue this avenue while simultaneously pursuing legal action. This reinforces the hierarchy/chain of command within an organization while ensuring accountability.
5. Whistleblower Protection: Explore legal provisions for whistleblower protection to safeguard herself against retaliation from the company. This aligns with the rights approach, protecting her right to speak out against wrongdoing.

Conclusion This case underscores the importance of prioritizing ethical conduct and employee well-being over short-term financial gains. The Vishaka Guidelines and subsequent POSH Act in India are positive initiatives that aim to create a safer workplace. Moving forward, companies must establish robust internal complaint mechanisms, provide mandatory sexual harassment training, and foster a culture of zero tolerance towards such behavior. This proactive approach, grounded in a deontological commitment to respecting individual rights and dignity, will create a more just and equitable work environment for all.