Corporate Social Responsibility and Ethical Analysis of Australian Mutual Provident

Running head: CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author note

2CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
Table of Contents
Introduction:........................................................................................................................4
Background and ethical question:....................................................................................5
Corporate Social Responsibility:.....................................................................................5
Creating shared value:.....................................................................................................7
Stakeholder analysis:.......................................................................................................8
ASX 2010 principles and recommendations:................................................................10
Ethical analysis:.............................................................................................................12

3CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
Introduction:
The assignment will analyse an issue relating to the companies investigated by the
Banking Royal Commission. The chosen organization in this assignment is Australian Mutual
provident. The organization was founded in the year 1849 and has been a key financial service
provider in Australia. The organization has its operation in Australia and New Zealand and the
headquarter lies at Sydney, Australia. AMP has the largest shareholders registered in Australia;
this is because when AMP demutualised the policy holder of the organization received shares
(loans, retirement and education 2018).

4CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
Background and ethical question:
After the investigation conducted by the banking royal commission, it can be seen that
AMP continues to charge the dead customers life insurance (Boleat 2012). AMP has admitted
that they continue to deduct life insurance premium from their deceased customer (Siegel 2013).
The reports suggest that the organization has charged more than 4600 deceased superannuation
life insurance customers. This has been done intentionally knowing that they are dead and there
was no more life insurer. The largest wealth manager of AMP owes about 1.3 million dollar in
lost earnings and the insurance premium to the deceased family members. The organization
knew about one of the similar incidents in 2016, but the organization started to investigate in
July after the revelations in the banking royal commission. On Monday, the customer and the
wealth executive told the enquiry team that there are other kinds of fees that also have been
deducted from the deceased customer’s account that also need to be refunded. The banking royal
commission heard the same incident when one of the staffs of the AMP questioned whether it is
justifiable to charge from the deceased customer’s bank account. Mr. Sainsburry explained that
the money which has been deducted from the account of the deceased customers will be
refunded once the death claim was submitted (Karim, Huda nad Khan 2012).
The ethical question that arises from the current scenario is that is it justifiable to charge
the deceased customer’s and deduct for their life insurance when there is no life to insure. The
amount which was deducted from the customer needs to be refunded to the deceased customer
family.