2. FREEDOM OF RELIGION A business has a backlog of orders, and to meet its deadlines, management decides to run the firm seven days a week, eight hours a day. One of the employees, Mark Tollens, refuses to work on Saturday on religious grounds. His refusal to work means that the firm may not meet its production deadlines and may therefore suffer a loss of future business. The firm fires Mark and replaces him with an employee who is willing to work 7 days a week. Mark claims that in terminating his employment, his employer violated his constitutional right to free exercise of religion. Do you agree- why and why not?

The following information is for alex corp: product x: revenue $12.00 variable cost $4.50 product y: revenue $44.50 variable cost $9.50 total fixed costs $75,000 what is the breakeven point assuming the sales mix consists of two units of product x and one unit of product y?

The state in which the manufacturing company you work for is located regulates the presence of a particular substance in the environment to concentrations ≤ x. recently-released, reliable research endorsed by the responsible federal agency conclusively demonstrates that the substance poses no risks at concentrations up to 5x. your company has asked you to consider designing a new process with a waste discharge stream containing up to 2x of the substance. based on the stated conditions, describe this possible.

David burdick is the ceo of acme bubblegum, a successful public company. as one of the cofounders of the company, burdick has enjoyed speaking and writing about the success of acme bubblegum for several years. typically, he speaks at conferences or directly to the press, but recently, he has been blogging about his firm anonymously. specifically, he defended a recent advertising campaign that was unpopular among consumers and pointedly attacked one of acme bubblegum’s competitors. burdick deeply enjoys his anonymous blogging and believes that none of his readers actually know that he works for acme bubblegum. should burdick be allowed to praise his company’s performance anonymously online? should he be allowed to attack his competitors without disclosing his relationship with the company? how would you feel if the ceo of a company at which you shopped was secretly writing criticisms of his or her competition? how would you feel if you knew a writer for your favorite blog was actually closely involved in a company that the blog discussed? 1. define the ethical issue? 2. who are the primary stakeholders? 3. what are the possible alternatives? 4. how could you evaluate the ethical implications of the alternative actions (use appropriate decision rules)? 5. what action would you recommend and why?