Pearly Dawn L.

Formilleza
Philo106-D
October 5, 2016

Movie Ethics Review

Introduction:

What Ive picked for my movie review is the film Erin Brockovich which was directed
by Steven Soderbergh and was released on March 17, 2000. Ive chose this film because it was
based on real life events of Erin Brockovich and her fight with PG&E. I really liked this movie
because it shows a number of ethical issues which PG&E was practicing. The movie portrays the
business word in a negative aspect and uses the PG&E as the center of the dispute. It showed a
concrete and real example of what will happen if a particular business will not practice corporate
social responsibility, doesnt give importance to corporate values, and corporate sustainability or
making a huge amount of harm to others by using them as a means to an end. The film also
displays unethical behaviors they might do to the environment and to the community they are in
with its corresponding ethical dilemmas. Like PG&E, they used bribery and deception to get
what they want and cover up their contamination on the groundwater of Hinkley to bare no other
expenses in clean up and etc.

Summary:

The movie revolves around a divorced unemployed ex-beauty queen desperate to find a job to
sustain her 3 children but has no luck finding one. She becomes connected to Ed Masrys law
firm because of an unfortunate traffic accident. She lost in the lawsuit and without any other
alternative, with no job and she had no money left, Erin pleads with her attorney to give her a job
in his law firm in compensation for the loss of her failed lawsuit. In the law firm, no one takes
her seriously because of the way she dressed and her manners. As she spends time filing papers
as a clerk, she becomes interested in the human nature of the medical cases and asked Ed to
allow her to investigate the case. Erin spends many hours studying the cases and finds a link
between the community members of Hinkley, CA and the company Pacific Gas and Electric
(PG&E) who have a plant in Hinkley. The movie goes on to show viewers several families in the
Hinkley community who have various health problems, from headaches, to miscarriages, to
gastrointestinal cancer. Although Erin does not have a law degree, she is able to expose many
details of this case through her conversations with these families. The film focuses on the
perspective of the law firm and the members of the Hinkley community and PG&Es case. Erin
also discovers the link between these health issues and the hexavalent chromium in the water,
which penetrate the water system through PG&Es plant in Hinkley.

Analysis:

There is nothing that I dislike in this movie because every scene of the movie is not fictional or
made; it was based on a real story. It was based on real events, real businesses and real people.
PG&E displayed what majority of the businesses would do in the event theyre dirty business
is being investigated. Just like in that scene where PG&E learn that Masrys law firm is
investigating their use of hexavalent chromium, and representative from PG&E is sent to
Masrys law firm to make an effort to stop the investigation.

A form of bribery was displayed when the representative offers to buy out the Jensen family
who has been affected by poor health, and their young daughter, Annabell, who is battling cancer
that is speculated to be linked to PG&E. He offers $250,000 to the Jensens in Hinkley, however
claims that PG&E has absolutely no responsibility for any medical conditions and would not pay
any medical expenses. This representative is perceived to be a heartless person who is not taking
responsibility for the damage his company has caused to families like the Jensens in the
community of Hinkley. Another form of bribery is when PG&E paid the doctors for the
checkups of the families in the Hinkley community.

Another example of the company was when an assumed employee from PG&E actually calls to
threaten the safety of Erin and her children. Erin is threatened by this person because PG&E
know that she has valuable information that could prove their fault in the health issues of the
Hinkley community members. Clearly, this act portrays the business world in a damaging way,
and I believe we would all hope that our co-workers and/or companies would never act in a way
to threaten an innocent mother and her family

The most obvious ethical dilemma of this film is the deception of PG&E, and the effect that the
deception had on the members of the community. In this case, PG&E deceived the entire town of
Hinkley by allowing them to believe that their water source was safe. Deception was clearly
portrayed throughout the film, with a particularly good example toward the beginning of the
movie. The film described how PG&E held a meeting with 200 people from Hinkley to explain
the benefits of PG&E using chromium 3 at their plant. Chromium 3 is similar to hexavalent
chromium (or chromium 6), however the deception is clear when the film goes on to show that
PG&E was not actually using chromium 3 at their plant, and was actually using the harmful
chromium 6 instead. Hexavalent chromium is extremely dangerous and harmful to humans. This
deceit continued for far too long, allowing the community to believe that children could safely
play in pools and all members could safely drink water out of their faucet. It was even proven
toward the end of the film that it was conscious complete deception,

Unfortunately, this issue was not resolved in the film as PG&E continued their denial and
dishonesty until the very end of the film. This company ended up losing the largest direct-action
lawsuit in United States history, therefore in some sense it was resolved with $333 million paid
to the people of Hinkley. They should have resolved this issue originally by removing the
hexavalent chromium from their processes and admitting wrongdoing. This company should
have done everything in their power to prevent health problems from starting in the first place, or
spreading to additional members of society. They also should have reimbursed anyone affected
by hexavalent chromium at the very beginning. PG&E was portrayed very negatively, and
should have taken various actions to prevent this situation from originally occurring

the issue of harming the environment was very clearly illustrated as a third ethical dilemma in
Erin Brockovich. This hexavalent chromium was clearly very dangerous to humans, and it was
also very harmful to the environment, especially the water system. PG&E was portrayed in an
extremely negative light once again because this company did not seem to care about
sustainability whatsoever. Sustainability was described in class to be The ability to meet the
needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own
needs. (UN 1987 Summit) PG&E did not enact policies to keep the water safe, and therefore
compromised the future of Hinkley by contaminating the water. In the film, attention was
specifically brought to the fact that PG&E skipped the step of adding liner to the pools at their
plant to keep the flow-off water safe. This clearly was harmful to the environment and risked
sustainability. PG&E did not resolve this dilemma until the very end of the movie when it stated
that PG&E claims to no longer use hexavalent chromium in any of their compressor plants and
holding ponds are now lined to prevent ground water contamination. It took the 5 lawsuit from
Erin Brockovich and Ed Masry to motivate them to prevent harmful contaminants from seeping
into the environment, when they should have taken care of this ethical dilemma from the
beginning. They should have taken the steps to line the pool and prevent all flow-off water from
being contaminated. PG&E could have resolved this ethical issue easily, however instead
continued on their path of unethical behavior which they paid for in the long run.

Conclusion:

Establishing Corporate values and practicing business ethics could help the organization
both in its image (as a company that values people and the environment) and as an organization
who generate a generous amount of profit. I believe by doing this, an organization would have
less or possible no ethical dilemmas to be faced. As Ive stated before this conclusion, PG&E is a
perfect example of this issue because of their lack of values and morals they only focused more
on gaining profit because frankly, they are a profit organization. PG&E was faced with their own
ethical dilemma, finding out that they have contaminated the groundwater of Hinkley with
carcinogenic hexavalent chromium. Not ready to face the consequences, PG&E thought of
covering it up by making the people believe or deceiving them that the chromium they use
Chromium 3 which has health benefits but the reality it was hexavalent chromium and bribing
the doctors to make the checkups clean to make the people believe in the lies PG&E told them.

Obviously, they use people as a means to an end; for their own benefit as multinational
corporation (to keep its reputation) to also make other people know/ to make other families know
that they can be trusted. And definitely, what they did backfired them, do unto others what you
want others do unto you.

It made me realize how important values are in our lives and how practicing moral standards of
both of the business and of yourself can go a long way for your business. Business also must
keep in mind the position of the people affected by their business other than their shareholders
and customers. They must do their part for the community and for the environment for future
generations to come (the public duty or obligation).

You must watch this movie because it is both inspiring, in the part of Erin Brockovich and
educating in terms of business ethics. A movie worth watching! Two thumbs up!