Business Law Ethics Uber and Lyft Drivers Case Study

December 2, 2022

Business Law Ethics Uber and Lyft Drivers Case Study

Order Number	636738393092
Type of Project	ESSAY
Writer Level	PHD VERIFIED
Format	APA
Academic Sources	10
Page Count	3-12 PAGES

Instructions/Descriptions

Business Law Ethics Uber and Lyft Drivers Case Study

[Order Now]

The paper should be 2 to 4 pages in length (double-spaced, 12-point Times New Roman font

Case Study Below:

Uber and Lyft driversare classified as independent contractors, rather than employees. Companies are not legally obligated to provide workers who are classified as independent contractors with the benefits owedto regular employees. Therefore, Uber and Lyft drivers are not legally entitled tosick leave.In the current coronavirus pandemic, this may force drivers tomake a choice between driving andnot getting paid. Drivers canhave a range of reasonsthat make them fearful todrivein the current situation. Onedriver isHIV-positive andhas a weakenedimmune system, putting him at higher risk of severe symptoms ordeathif he contracts the virus. Another driverwas recently notified that he has been in contact with someone who tested positivefor coronavirus,and fears he maypose a risk to his passengers. A third driver has started coughing, sneezing, and has a slight temperature, and is worried that she may have the virus and could infect passengers.

Questions to be answered in the paper:

Please address the following questions (in the order given):

1) Contrast Shareholder Theory and Stakeholder Theory: How does each theory claim that a corporation should be managed? What is the goal or objective of corporate governance according to each theory?

2) Consider the brief case study outlined above. What would Shareholder Theory recommendcompanies like Uber and Lyft do in this case? What would Stakeholder recommend these companies do?

[Order Now]

3) Was the Business Roundtable rightto issue the August 2019 statement in support of Stakeholder Theory (and rejectingtheir previous endorsement of Shareholder Theory)? Which theory offers the better approach? Why?

4) Which ethical framework (Utilitarianism or Deontology) justifies your view? Explain how theethical framework leads you to support one theory or the other.

Business Law Ethics Uber and Lyft Drivers Case Study

RUBRIC

Excellent Quality

95-100%

Introduction

45-41 points

The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed.

Literature Support

91-84 points

The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed.

Methodology

58-53 points

With titles for each slide as well as bulleted sections to group relevant information as required, the content is well-organized. Excellent use of typeface, color, images, effects, and so on to improve readability and presenting content. The minimum length criterion of 10 slides/pages is reached.

Average Score

50-85%

40-38 points

More depth/information is required for the context and importance, otherwise the study detail will be unclear. There is no search history information supplied.

83-76 points

There is a review of important theoretical literature, however there is limited integration of research into problem-related ideas. The review is just partly focused and arranged. There is research that both supports and opposes. A summary of the material given is provided. The conclusion may or may not include a biblical integration.

52-49 points

The content is somewhat ordered, but there is no discernible organization. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on may sometimes distract from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached.

Poor Quality

0-45%

37-1 points

The context and/or importance are lacking. There is no search history information supplied.

75-1 points

There has been an examination of relevant theoretical literature, but still no research concerning problem-related concepts has been synthesized. The review is just somewhat focused and organized. The provided overview of content does not include any supporting or opposing research. The conclusion has no scriptural references.

48-1 points

There is no logical or apparent organizational structure. There is no discernible logical sequence. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on often detracts from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached.