Business Law Essay: Offshoring And On-shoring In Occupational Health.

Write about the Business Law Report for Occupational Health.

The purpose of this report is to critically analyze offshoring and on-shoring with regard to the Australian laws and foreign laws. These two terms are not term of law but they can be connected to laws in their fully capacity. Therefore, the report will consider occupation health and safety as well as anti-discrimination and equal opportunities in offshoring and on-shoring both located in Australian. That is why this paper will apply the Australian laws and any other relevant foreign laws for that matter. For the purpose of this report, concrete knowledge on offshoring and on-shoring need to be redefined. Both offshoring and on-shoring refers to methods of outsourcing. Typically, outsourcing means a situation where a company contract part of its tasks to an external company (Maslow 2013). With that said and done, on-shoring can be defined or typically refers to the relocation of industry processes to a location involving lower costs within the national boundaries of a particular country. For this paper, on-shoring will be within the boundaries of Australia. On the other hand, offshoring can be defined broadly as outsourcing that is purely done across national borders. That is, a distant location is preferred for that matter.

This section will consider various aspects such as law and theories concerning offshoring and on-shoring, case study or court cases, then the mere comparison of offshoring and on-shoring, the most appropriate area of development as well as location of offshoring and on-shoring. This will help this report to analyze anti-discrimination and equal opportunities in similar capacity.

Law is very important to a society. Law typically mean the rules and regulations that have been set by the government so as to government the people through the customs and judicial process to as to promote peaceful coexistence among the citizen (McGregor 2012). This definition fall under business law as well where investors and business fraternity follow certain rules and regulations in order to promote proper grounds in the field of business among the business people. For this report, this will involve both offshoring and on-shoring. The law on occupational health and safety is referred to as OHSA law in Australian laws. The Australian law state that the OSH Act involves employers. In that case, employers are purely responsible in provision of safe and healthful workplace. For the case of offshoring and on-shoring, the law will ensure safe and healthful workplace settings and standards are fully enforced. Ant training, assistance, education as well as outreach in offshoring and on-shoring need to be provided by the employer as stated in the Australian law. The theory involved here is the Accident theory. The law is very clear on that. The theory connects safety and productivity. This implies that the business of offshoring and on-shoring need to identify the possible risks and entropy model of accidents. Both entropy and residual risk need to be identified and reduced. Any possibility of degradation of offshoring and on-shoring business systems need to be reduced. Again, the inherent danger in the entire activities of the organization need to be reduced as stated in the OSH Act of Australian law.

Law and theories

A case study refers typically as a previous scenario in law that can be used to compare aspects in the legal law. Decision can be made based on precedents. A court case as well involves a previous case that had been presented a decision can be as well be made from the court case. According to the Australian case studies all the case studies are used for reference to other cases at stake. There is a particular case law interpretation in Australia regarding the occupational health and safety. The case study Milat v The Queen (2004) HCA 17, R v Gilmore (1977) 2 NSWLR 934N can be interpreted as follows. The criminal matter is the Queen while the accused is Gilmore. This particular case was reported in 1977 and indicates part of the NSW law report series. In addition, the case is found in volume 2 and usually started on page 935. The case study can be used similarly to solve case in offshoring and on-shoring.

Both on-shoring and offshoring are the commonly used methods of outsourcing. Typically, outsourcing means a situation where a company contract part of its tasks to an external company (Thomas 2009). With that said and done, on-shoring can be defined or typically refers to the relocation of industry processes to a location involving lower costs within the national boundaries of a particular country. For this paper, on-shoring will be within the boundaries of Australia. On the other hand, offshoring can be defined broadly as outsourcing that is purely done across national borders (Ryan & Deci 2017). That is, a distant location is preferred for that matter. Typically, offshoring involves the relocation of industry or business processes to the preferred cheaper location in a different country. This will be involving outsourcing activities of a company as well as setting up a subsidiary in another country.

The choice of area for offshoring can be all the areas outside Australia that are recommended in the Australian law. This is possible provided the outsourcing procedures involved in offshoring business system lowers the cost of operation outside the boarders of Australia. However, the area of the development must be governed by Australian law together with the relevant foreign laws that correspond with the area of offshoring (Marylene 2014). The area for developing the on-shoring must be located in Australia since it involves outsourcing within the borders of Australia.  However, the area of choice must lower the cost of operations for the business. According to Australian and foreign law, on-shoring will benefit the business if done within the borders of Australia. This area must adhere to the rules and regulations of Australia on occupation and safety.

Case study or court case

The case on on-shoring is based on a case within the borders of Australia because the business operations takes place within the boards of Australia. Hence, the comparison between on-shoring and offshoring with regard to occupational health and safety is governed by Australian law and any relevant foreign law for the case of offshoring.

Considering the case of Blomley v Ryan (1956) 99 CLR 362, both the plaintiff and the defendant were citizen of Australia involve in civil case of on-shore outsourcing.  In this case, the plaintiff was Blomley who brought the course of action about the on-shore outsourcing. Ryan was the defendant who was resisting the course of action (Lambsdorff 2012). This case was reported in 1956 and fall under the category of commonwealth law report series under volume 99. The judgment of this case started at page 362 where Ryan was found guilty of illegal on-shoring. This case was determined within the boundaries if Australia.

The jurisdictions of cases involving the offshoring are bound to the Australian legal law and the foreign law involved in a particular case unlike in on-shoring. Considering the case of Gilmore v, The Queen (1977) 2 NSWLR 935, the criminal matter was the queen while the accused was Gilmore. This case was reported in1977 and indicates that it was part of NSW law report series. Moreover, the case was found in volume and usually commence at page 935 (Richard 2013). Gilmore was from Australia while The Queen originated from the USA. Therefore, the ruling on this case must consider both the Australian law and the USA law before making the judgment.  In this case The Queen was found guilty of offshoring claims that involved illegal business transactions.

The law relating to anti-discrimination and equal opportunities is called equity law. The Australian law of equity ensures that all parties are offered equal chances as far as on-shoring and offshoring are concerned. Anybody who denies other that equal opportunity is deemed to have committed a tort. A tort is simply a civil wrong (Lambsdorff 2011). The law states that law is equality. The main theory in this particular area is called proportionality theory. It asserts that all business people have opportunities to venture in business in proportionate rates. Therefore, as far as anti–discrimination and equal opportunities are concerned, the Australian law of equity and theory of proportionality take effect.

A case study that can be brought forward concerning anti-discrimination and equal opportunities in regard to offshoring and on-shoring can be found in both criminal and civil case study. The case study will rule in favor of anti-discrimination and equal opportunities.

Offshores and onshore comparison

There is no much difference between offshoring and on-shoring in anti-discrimination and equal opportunities from occupation health and safety. In this case, the law of contract assert that a contract deems valid when there is an offer and acceptance of the offer (Stiglitz & Joseph 2003). Therefore, offshoring will involve outsourcing business activities outside Australia at a lower cost while on-shoring will involve outsourcing of business activities within Australia. However, before this is achieved, the law need to provide equal chances on both offshoring and on-shoring to the individual contractors. In case of any legal action both Australian law and foreign law will be considered without discriminating any law.

The area of development for on-shoring should be based in Australia. Under this section, the area should be in marginalized areas where the on-shoring had not been done due to discrimination. For offshoring, the area of development should be outside Australia. This area should be in developing countries that have been discriminated before.

Considering the case of Blomley v Ryan (1956) 99 CLR 362, both the plaintiff and the defendant were citizen of Australia involve in civil case of on-shore outsourcing.  In this case, the plaintiff was Blomley who brought the course of action about the on-shore outsourcing. Ryan was the defendant who was resisting the course of action (Kanungo & Manuel 2014). This case was reported in 1956 and fall under the category of commonwealth law report series under volume 99.

The jurisdictions of cases involving the offshoring are bound to the Australian legal law and the foreign law involved in a particular case unlike in on-shoring (Arnold 2010). Considering the case of Gilmore v, The Queen (1977) 2 NSWLR 935, the criminal matter was the queen while the accused was Gilmore.

Conclusion.

In conclusion, offshoring involves the relocation of industry or business processes to the preferred cheaper location in a different country. This will be involving outsourcing activities of a company as well as setting up a subsidiary in another country. The Australian law has critically analyzed this by looking into details the occupation health and safety as well as anti-discrimination and equal opportunities. 

References.

Arnold, J 2010, Coaching Skills for Leaders in the Workplace: How to Develop, Motivate and Get the Best from Your Staff, How to Books.

Kanungo, R.N., & Manuel, M.  (2014). Work Motivation: Models for Developing Countries. Sage Publication put.

Lambsdorff, JG 2011, Report of the Auditor General, University of Goetingen.

Lambsdorff, JG 2012, Corruption and Rent-seeking, public choice.

Marylene, G 2014, the Oxford Handbook of Work Engagement, Motivation and Self-Determination Theory, OUP USA.

Maslow, AH 2013, A Theory of Human Motivation, Start publishing LLC.

McGregor, D 2012, the Human Side of Enterprise, New Yolk, 21.

Richard, A 2013, Job Satisfaction from Herzberg’s Two Factor Theory Perspective. Grin publishing.

Ryan, RM., & Deci, EL2017, Self-Determination Theory: Basic Psychological Need in Motivation, development and Wellness. The Guilford presses.

Stiglitz & Joseph, E 2003, Globalization and its Discontents, Norton & Company Inc. 

Thomas, KW2009, Intrinsic Motivation: What Really Drives Employees Engagement, Berret-Koehler publishers.

Lambsdorff, JG 2012, ‘making corrupt deals-contracting in the shadow of the law’, journal of Economic behavior and organization, pp. 221-241.

Committee of sponsoring organization of the treadway commission, internal control-integrated framework. Available from: www.ic.coso.org.

Committee of sponsoring organization of the treadway commission, internal control-integrated framework, guidance for smaller public companies reporting on internal control over financial reporting. Available from: https://www.ic.coso.org.

Committee of sponsoring organization of the treadway commission, Enterprise Risk Management –integrated framework. Available from: www.ic.coso.org.