The UK government responded to the Coronavirus outbreak by announcing that all retail outlets except those deemed to provide essential services and goods would be closed immediately. Online retail, however, is “still open and encourage”.
Does that mean we are free to click?
Andrew Crane, a business professor, and Dirk Matten, a lawyer and ethics expert, argue that a decision is ethical if it affects others in a significant way and is characterized by choice. It is also considered ethically relevant by one or more parties.
We would all agree that buying essentials like food and medicine is acceptable. Even if the alternative is not available, such as in the case of millions of people who are at risk of serious health problems, suffer from COVID-19 symptoms, or cannot shop in person.
What about items that aren’t absolutely necessary? For example, clothing that you want but don’t need, home décor, games and toys, garden furniture, accessories and beauty products, or, depending on how you look at it, even the Easter Egg.
Consumer concerns vs business concerns
Unfit warehouses are a concern. Stories/Freepik, CC BY-SA
Marks and Spencer and John Lewis are being criticized for their online trading during the Coronavirus outbreak. Marks and Spencer has defended their position, stating “additional hygiene and social distancing measures as well as financial assistance” for its staff.
Unions such as the GMB, Usdaw and have argued that it is impossible to guarantee the safety of employees at this point. Rachel Reeves of the UK Parliament’s Treasury Committee warned that businesses will be held accountable for their treatment of workers and suppliers.
What about the consumers? Do we have any moral obligation in this matter?
can easily be ignored when a purchase is on the horizon. By applying Crane’s and Matten’s three criteria, we can see how ethics should be a factor in our decision.
A significant effect on others. By purchasing non-essentials, I could endanger warehouse staff or delivery drivers’ health and well-being. If I do not buy non-essentials on the internet, I could be putting their lives at risk.
Characterised as a choice. I can delay or abandon the purchase of the item.
One or more parties perceive online shopping as being ethically relevant. A variety of stakeholders, including government officials, retailers, and unions, have spoken out in favor and against the practice.
What should we buy now?
We are ultimately responsible for making the decision to buy non-essentials on the internet (unless, of course, further government restrictions come into play, which would remove the “choice” element from the equation). We must, therefore, weigh both the pros and cons and come to a conclusion.
Some retailers who continue to sell non-essential products online have a number of advantages, such as the fact that they can mitigate against the financial impact of having to close brick and mortar stores. This is especially true for small businesses, which may not have a lot of financial reserves.
In some cases, it helps to create new jobs. The service also offers some comfort to customers in a difficult time, both physically and psychologically.
Online ordering can put delivery drivers in danger. Freepik, CC BY
Critics, however, respond that health and safety is put at risk for profit-making (or reducing a loss) by warehouse staff, delivery driver, and post workers. Worries about warehouse conditions still exist despite the fact that many companies have implemented contactless delivery. As the situation worsens and more employees become sick or have to isolate themselves, the burden will increase on those who are still working.
What are the implications of this? In the current climate, your gut instinct may be the best guide. Do you get nervous when placing an order? You might be reluctant to share your success with someone. Consider leaving your purchases in the basket for the moment.