A0153 Corporate Social Responsibility/AL 2012
A discussion area where you will change opinions about what it means to be "socially responsible". People and organisations should have special sensitivity towards social, cultural, economic, and environmental issues. The discussion concentrates on Nokia, Finnair and Nordea and their recents personnel policy.
- JaakkoL (4) | Helsinki
- Juho (7) | Helsinki
- ALumio (1) | Vantaa
- Sannamakinen (1) | Helsinki
- Kimambo (1) | Espoo
- ssandvik (1) | Helsinki
- HRuohio (1) | Espoo
- LNorja (1) | Espoo
- ANiemi (1) | Helsinki
- SPesonen (1) | Espoo
- ASoderstrom (1) | Helsinki
- PSuhonen (1) | Espoo
- Tvirtanen (1) | Lahti
- AVillanen (1) | Espoo
- mvarelius (1) | Espoo
- SRytkonen (1) | Espoo
- HSahlberg (1) | Espoo
- AAsiala (1) | Helsinki
- sarianna (1) | Vantaa
- MVuorinen (1) | Espoo
- TToropainen (1) | Helsinki
- TRaikkonen (1) | Vantaa
- NBunyoo (1) | Vantaa
- EMouhu (1) | Helsinki
- MStylman (1) | Espoo
- AJoutsen (1) | Espoo
- ivenalainen (1) | Espoo
- PHiljander (1) | Hevostallin Takana
- VRaskinen (1) | Espoo
- HVisakova (1) | Espoo
- TToivanen (1) | Espoo
- REskelinen (1) | Espoo
- ARiikonen (1) | Espoo
- KToivonen (1) | Helsinki
- HKonki (1) | Espoo
- SKOIVULA (1) | Espoo
- LasseAijo (1) | Espoo
- HInkin (1) | Espoo
- TRosengren (1) | Helsinki
- HLatvala (1) | Vantaa
- KHaapalahti (1) | Helsinki
- JRieppo (1) | Vantaa
- millanurminen (1) | Finland
- KAhotupa (1) | Helsinki
- EWinqvist (1) | Vantaa
- BSilve (1) | Helsinki
- HAlve (1) | Espoo
- EJLehti (1) | Helsinki
- Sharkhotel (1) | Helsinki
- MHaque (1) | Helsinki
- RSaukkonen (1) | Helsinki
- MHanhike (1) | Helsinki
- LammiT (1) | Helsinki
- Alaine (1) | Helsinki
- AKronberg (1) | Helsinki
- NMannermaa (1) | Vantaa
- MaxG (1) | Espoo
- RHemmi (1) | Helsinki
- ARuokolainen (1) | Järvenpää
- biraure (1) | Espoo
- LauraR (1) | Helsinki
Group's call of contents
Unemployment is formed together with the developing technology to increase efficiency. Bands of manufacturing robots, testing systems, which simulate processes such as.
• Logitech has announced that they laid off 600 employees.
• Intel announced that close its manufacturing facility in the Philippines which its provide 1800 employees income.
• Sony explained their “restructuring “ plan. As a result of thıs plan they announced the dismissal of many people.
• Sega announced the dismissal of the 30 people.
As can be seen all of these examples, the development of technology is caused increasing unemployment. They claım that the technology works more effectively and efficiently. Additionally technology reduced the product costs.
These kind of examples like Nordea are plenty. And usually the problem is with big, usually governmental institutions like KELA or Finnish Tax Administration. Everything is done in the hard way and always with paper. Is it possible with the modern technology to use e-tax card instead of old paper cards for example?
And I think that most funny way to save paper is to use this automatic phrase at the end of your email where is suggested NOT to print unnecessary emails when this phrase takes more than one sheet of paper. It´s not once or twice that I have printed this totally useless page.
In year 2011 Finnair flew first international flight with biofuel. Finnair has planned that after 3-5 years biofuel could be taken into regular flights and that way the company could decrease their carbon footprint. We think that it is good thing to use biofuels, because it is ecofriendly and slows climate change. Also Finnair has created a page dedicated to introducing biofuel.
First Finnair decided to fly only once in a week using biofuels. We suggest and hope that the amount of the use of biofuel during flights would increase. Unfortunately the price of biofuel is nearly two times as high as normal fuel due to the fact that there’s only one company that produces biofuels, Neste Oil. If even one other oil company started producing biofuel, maybe the price of it would lower because of market competition.
In many places you can read about social responsibility things but I don't even bother to read all of it. So we should develop some new way to get informatioin to the people so that put people to pay attention to these things.
Our team discussed about Finnair's food serving, and those unpractical foilo boxes they use, whitch are unfriendly for the nature. Since other aircompanies, for example Blue1, have already figured out to use paper made boxes, we were suprised that Finnair hasn't started to use those too. Paper made boxes would be more eco-friendly, since those would decompose in the end, and customers would get more better image about company.
We totally agree in this one. It's unbelievable that a company of this magnitude hasn't done something as simple as this. It is a small step for the company but would give a good impression to the customers if they would have recyclable food boxes and it would do good to the nature also. If u imagine the amount of food boxes is used by Finnair every year, the amount of the foil waste is massive. Small steps like this makes a big different.
I is a relatively large thing to change even such a small thing as lunch box in a large company like Finnair, and can also cost more,. but if the general way of thinking from top to bottom in the corporation configuration could be changed, the company could start making a name for it self by being enviromental friendly in general,. I believe that things like that would speak for them selves and bring the invested money back by positive feedback and image.
It´s funny to notice how easy it is to develope thing like that. Many companys` habbits and ways to produce their services and productions could be fixed very easily to more social responsible way. That´s why companys should know better their part of supporting social responsibility
Team 6 wrote about recyclin old mobilephones and some idea also came up to my mind.
I agree that recycling is very important. It is good that old, unuseful phones and pieces goes to the right places. But I also started to think about that how often old phones are not unuseful and broken but they are that old that companies can not sell them anymore. Why should we only separate the pieces of old phones? The companies, in this case Nokia could collect old phones that are still usefull and send them to the poor areas for example to the Africa.
I saw this kind of program in Ireland. People got the small plastic bag inside the normal newspapers and on the back there was a text like "Do you have old phone that you dont use? Why you dont gife it to the african poors?" And with that bag everyone could sent own old phone to the company and there they sent phones to Africa.
I think this kind of program would also work here in Finland.
That would be really great idea for Nokia to use as campaing mode. Their status would raise among customers, it wouldn't require too much of resources, when thinking the size of that company, and it really would help people in developing countrys. I believe it could work in Finland too, as it did in Ireland.
YLE published an article couple years ago concerning about mobile phones' questionable recycling in online stores. There was said that recycling phones properly is expensive and there's no certainty that the those companies are recycling the phones appropriately. In the same article, there was mentioned about Nokia's research about people's mobile phone recycling habits and the results showed that only four percent of the mobile phone owners are recycling their old phones.
I think that team 3's idea is good. Everybody doesn't have enough money to buy a new phone in some countries and approximately 60 percent of people has many old (and maybe working) phones at home..
So, Nokia collect old phones help with 6000 places in Finlad, but only for using them for new products, not for sharing to poors guys.
On the same page is also said that before you recycle your phone ask from your friends do they ned it. That is good, but I am wondering how well does that work?
We inspected Finnairs web sites. It was good to notice that they emphasized green values and eco-friendliness there. For example they have reduced emissions 22 % per seat between 1999 and 2009. We think that it is important to reduce pollution in air travelling. although it is difficult to get people to buy more expensive flights. Our development idea is that finnair could invent some inducements for travelling people in order to get them avoid low-cost airline flights. Usually low-cost airline planes fly only the most popular routes. That is why one might need to use several flights instead of one. Usually direct flight may cost more than several flights that low-cost airline offers. Flying straight to direction will decrease pollution and save enviroment.
Our team's opinion is that it would be great if most of the people would travel with airlines which fly straight to the destination. In the end it would be impossible to implement. Customers are more aware of the different prices and cheaper airlines. And if people would travel only with airlines like Finnair, would it reduce customers from smaller airlines. So the situation is very complicated. Of course customer can decide whether he/she will travel with more environmental friendly airline.
After reading other student’s opinions about social responsibility on different organizations’ web pages, it was seen that people have not had much knowledge about these organizations’ CSR-programmes before this course. The reason for that is probably that these organizations haven’t been very active in marketing social responsibility and our group thought that such big organizations as Finnair, Nordea and Nokia should be more active in giving information about such things. We chose to develop a new idea for Finnair as they have been on news about negative issues lately and as they have very interesting thoughts about social responsibility.
We think that putting more effort on marketing CSR would help both, the organization and customers. Now when there is a small part of Finnair’s web page that includes information about social responsibility, most of the customers do not even recognize it. As Finnair considers the environmental is
MHA 1121 Team 9 Grönholm, Kimambo, Lehti, Räikkönen
...environmental issues in their every day actions, they should also market those things to their customers. That way the organization would get more good publicity as a socially responsible organization and at the same time customers would get knowledge about environmental issues. Finnair could get even more clients if they started a campaign about their socially responsible actions.
This is why speed and comfortability are number one priorities in airlines' marketing. Campaigning for environmental sustainability isn't a bad thing, quite the contrary, but it does not appeal to customers as much.
If you buy a TV, you probably care more about the quality of the image and sound than the fact that 22% less emissions were produced in the production of that TV compared to other TV's. Promoting that information to customers does not bring any significant advantage to the company and is therefore not prioritized.
Campaigning for other aspects of CSR than eco-friendliness, on the other hand, could be effective as you mentioned.
It is good that Finnair is social responsible and they have pollution calculator on their website. With it a customer may choose a flight that cause less pollution. Finnair has many other eco-friendly innovations too but still air traveling is the most pollutant way of traveling. Our idea is that Finnair should have more direct flights because they pollute much less than indirect flights. People often choose to flight wrong direction first because it is cheaper than direct flight but if they had a choice to flight direct with the same price there would be less pollution.
We think that you have a good point there. It is great that Finnair has done much to be more eco-friendly but there is still much to do. It is true that people should choose the most ecological way but that is a very big challenge in times like these where there are so many other cheaper options. Finnair should find a way why people would rather pay a little more. One possibility could be to become even more ecological and then make some promo about it.
Finnair's social responsibility is very broad. It reaches into society and internationality. Workplace should be a decent working environment, as well as flexible and secure. Thus woke up the idea of an employee in and around the network into account. This is true by all the organizations, but between work and home brought together, would be a good healer of social responsibility. Employees take care of education and job satisfaction to increase. Good to be focused on some of the resources in the employee's own support networks.
We have been considering Nordea’s social responsibility. Nordea has been laying off a lot people last few years. They are still laying off people because they want to ensure their strong position in the markets. They argue on their webpage that they want to ensure good customer relationships.
They justify shutting down most of their offices in small cities by saying that it improves their customer service. But instead for example they have left out some of the services they used to have in their offices, but are now only doable online or something, and now people have longer distances into their offices and there are more customers in each office. That means waiting even longer for the service. We know that it is beneficial for the company to shut down some services and lay off people, but it certainly doesn’t help the customer service and it is frustrating to run errands in their offices.
Well this is logical continuum because people have started to use more and more services in the internet. Especially internet bank services are very much used because it can make transaction so much easier and quicker. But we still are very concerned about elderly people because they use bank services very much but they have difficulties to adapt to modern technology. How can we ensure their services if we only think about development?
We thing that you got a very good point there. Lots of banks have been reduced of their services on these days. We also thing that is pretty Hippocratic action from Nordea to say that they would like to improve their customer service when at the same time they are laying off that many people and shutting down of that much agency's. Of course we should remember that the economic situation of the world is unstable at the moment but they should really thing do they always have to decrease their of expenditures by laying off people or is there any other way to spare some money?
We agree that it is harmfull to centralize business in bigger cities. It will cause unemployment in small towns and as team 2 said it will increase the waiting time to get service.In metropolitan area one can see it already.
Today environmental issues have become more important to people than they have ever been. Recycling is one off the biggest things that has an effect on our environment. And also it's one of the easiest ways for everyone to do their part in securing our living environment
Our groups proposal to Nokia company is for them to establish recycling system for the old and used mobile phones. People could bring their phones to be reused in exchange for a small amount of money. By recycling the old phones and other parts, like chargers, the amount of unnecessary waste could be reused significantly. This kind of system would surely bring more respect for the company. And what could be more important than protecting the diversity of our nature.
We think that Team 6's idea could work and it would be good for the environment and it would also make Nokia look better. It has been done before but it was just a campaign(?) so maybe Nokia could develop a permanent system? They could also try to do more recyclable phones so it would pay itself back in the future when people would bring their phones back.
you just send them your old phone and they will pay for it what its worth and if its useable sell it again after maintenance. I think this is just the kind of company that the world needs more of.
The phone companies could encourage people to recycle the phones more. A little amount of money would be a good way to do that!
Our idea involves the well-being of the employees. Nokia is moving more and more manufacturing to Asia and Eastern Europe. Economically this makes sense. The production rates are lower and employees work for less. However in today’s society it is important for consumers to know where their items come from. Just like all other companies Nokia promises that no for example child or forced labor or underpaid employees work in their factories. Even though we think it is great that Nokia is taking such responsibility when it comes to its employees, we think it would be great if the customers of Nokia could have some proof of this. Nokia could dedicate an entire website for this purpose. On this website they could list the factories, contact information, affirmation of the factories license,… Nokia is such a big and important part of Finland’s image and economical and social life that it is important that information about their social respons
This was a great idea you've come up with. We Team9 think that big organization like Nokia should provide more information on how do they deal with environment friendly. It's said that environment can be affected by organization's activities. And the effects of organization's activities can take place in different forms, example utilization of natural resources as a part of its production process, big organization like Nokia should put information on their site. Another issue is transformation of landscape due to raw material extraction or waste product storage, enrichment of the local community through the employment opportunities. Nokia import raw materials from Asia, Africa and other part of the world, how do they deal with environment issues/distractions from those areas??
Team 5 idea is based on companies outsourcing. When companies have outsourced employees, they have transferred employees to work in similar companies. When the company outsources services the employee who already has the experience and the education for the job can be moved to the new company. Our groups idea is that companies could cooperate and incase of layoffs. They could create a system where the layoff person can be transferred or gain easier opportunities when applying for a new job. And the companies could before the layoff, plan what kind of workplace these layoff person are going to go. The companies could take responsibility by trying to ensure that the layoff person has a job in the future. It takes less working hours and effort when the companies decide the next working place in the beginning of the contract.
agrees with you team 5. It would be exellent if the companies could work together and when some company has to lay off people they could at the same time give these cooperated companies more information of the people they have lay off. this way the person who will be fired will have a good change to get new job with good recomendations and doesn´t have to worrie about job. If the companies cooperate not only the fired employees will gain but the companies as well. To recruit a employee it is hard work and takes a lot of time and effort. But as the team 5 said with cooperation they all save some time. The company which lays off people doesn´t have to worrie about laid off personell and the new company gets professional personel with good recomendations. Very good idea team 5.
Our team's new developing idea is that companies should work together with for example towns and employment agencies. Together they could develop some kind of programme that would help people who have been unemployed for a long time and people who have been excluded from society to get back to working life. It could include for example retraining for a totally new job or then just help to get back to what they already have some experience from. This could be a good idea because lately there has been a lot of discussion about young people getting excluded from the society. This might not work with jobs that require special knowledge or skills but for example in the service sector it could be possible.
"Together they could develop some kind of programme that would help people who have been unemployed for a long time and people who have been excluded from society to get back to working life."
Many municipality have programs like this in fact and are working together with the local large employees to find new jobs and plans for the workers futures. How ever, many times when you hear that a company, like Nokia or Nordea are laying off workers the decicion has allready been made before consulting the workers or the local municipality.
continues We in group 9 think that more discussion is needed even before any decicions have been made. If a company, its part or some manufacturing site is not doing so good and it would have to downzise, it would be good to take the workers and the local autorities as well as subcontractors in to the discussion to find alternative sollutions and to inform the people involved, layed off etc. as soon as possible. It is not allways possible for a company to find work for the workers in the same field or are aor company, but the over all idea of taking care of the employee should be more comprehensive and sincere.
Because I've been working to Finnair Group I can tell you that they treat them pretty well. They have their own trade union and the salary good. Still people want more and more salary, which is understandable. However, we have think in terms of firm, too. Then be happy that we a job!
I'm also ready to pay little more for the tickets if i get good service and safty feeling during the flight.
We as team agree with you on that! Recruiting new employees and laying off old ones are parts of normal business activity based on the rules of supply and demand. Basically, this has nothing to do with CSR itself - how the company conducts these changes in their workforce, however, is a matter of responsibility. According to comments below, Finnair, for example, has made some poor choices in recent years and has thus had its share of negative news coverage, but the reverse side of this of doesn't get as much daylight. Finnair puts much effort on responsible recruiting processes, but how come this is not regarded as positive responsibility?
Our team’s developing idea is that Nokia should concentrate more funding & effort to developing new innovative ways of making ecofriendly and “green” mobile phones. It’s already something they are concentrating on but this could even be used as a marketing strategy. If Nokia were to develop new environmentally friendly ways of producing phones that were more energy efficient which would save electricity, they could promote themselves with this. This could raise their economic situation by bringing more customers, because the world’s population is slowly but surely understanding the importance of social responsibility & seeing reason behind the developing of environmentally friendly methods of producing. If Nokia could improve their placement on the market, they might be able to hire more people, for example some of those people they’ve had to lay off recently, and keep those employees whose future employment is at stake at the moment.
Also in our group opinion is that it would be the best way to grow up to better over their competitors. For making those "green" mobilephones, Nokia has already on some their phones very interesting games. One example is Climate mission ( this is hyperlink that you would know it better. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WRSacs14HEA&feature=related )
It is ecologically themed games while discovering how to reduce your own ecological footprint. Is it a waste of time to develop this kind of games or is it really important to spend lot of money to develop game that is making millions of people aware about the environment issues and support it?
We think that this idea by team 4 is a good one. It might not be something that Nokia could pull off right now, but it could be something they should start focusing on and in the future ecofriendly mobile phones might be something people would be interested in. Marketing their products as ecofriendly phones could give Nokia an advantage against their rivals. Some people are willing to sacrifice other qualities in a procuct if the product is produced in environmentally friendly way or if it saves electricity or is good for environment in some other way.
They don't consider their own employees, based on laying offs and news during last years. I don't believe that pilots or factory workers would be striking, if they would consider their status in the corporation as statisfying. It is good that these corporations are carrying their weight of better planet's future, but they really should also take a minute for their own people.
Nokia is also supporting society based projects that are affecting education, income and health. As an example they use South Africa where kids are using their mobile phones to learn mathematics or how Nokia Data Gathering is helping to fight deceases like dengue-fever in Amazon, but at the same time Nokia is laying off thousands of people in Finland. It makes these "goals" of theirs look a little less trustworthy and wrongly prioritized.
Our group also explored Nokia's socaial responsibility methods and we think that Nokia has some great ways to actualizing them, e.g the educational way that you mentioned. It might be very efficient for a big and well-known company such as Nokia to make those improvements in all sectors of their business. Nokia is a modern/western-world company which has a great impact on the poeple who live in developed countries. Therefore Nokia (among other social responsible companies) could be a great role model, showing example and leading the way towards a much more environmental and social responsible world!
Nordea promotes that they work sustainably by making responsible investments and against financial crimes. It says on the website that Nordea cares for employees and values safety at work and gender equality. This all look good in the paper but somehow it sound like just empty rethoric.
Besides the decreasing impact on the environment from e.g flying, the person attending the meeting don't have to sacrifice time or money in the actual traveling for just a few hours of discussion. That valuable time (and money) can then be invested in other beneficial things.
That is one way of corporal social responsibility that must be copied by many other companies!
We chose Nordea to our subject, because they have layed off a lot people in recent years. In the webpage of Nordea it is said that they always work in humane way. Still Nordea is laying off people because they wan't to ensure good customer relationships and their strong position in the markets.
Why do they argue that laying off people will make their customers relationships better? Nordea has shut down their offices in some smaller cities and they justify it by saying that it improves their customers services. We feel that it is not benefit of the customers to shut down the offices. Some old people for example may have to travel to another region to get the service they need.
Services centralization seems to be fashion nowadays. People in smaller cities are being afflicted by cutting these kind of services that they need in everyday life.
Our team also thinks that this is a very important topic. It's insane to remove offices from smaller towns and cities, and to just expect that people will follow to where ever the big office is situated. It's outrageous to force especially elderly people to travel tens of kilometers to the nearest bank. What Nordea should do in our opinion, is to start co-operating with other banks and the banks should in union start new small offices in smaller cities that would provide at least the basic bank services. This would be more environmentally responsible as instead of eg. 3 separate small banks there would be 1 bank that could share their heating, electricity and other necessities.
We thought that team4’s idea is great! Nordea can’t be completely social responsibility if it discriminates against older people who live in the countryside and who can’t use Internet. Some banks should cooperate and have little banks together in the smaller cities. Their customers will be more pleased and banks would be more social responsibility.
There is said in Nordea's websites that "Nordea's e-services make your banking easier". At the same time, there's news about shutting down offices, just because Nordea's customers are using the real offices' services only for discussing about their banking issues and getting advice.
Although it is good that Nordea is thinking in a social responsible way and trying to reduce its paper consumption, there is still no reason to minimize the real face-to-face service in smaller cities. There can always be problems with reaching service via internet or phone, as team 3 said previously. Where's the easy part then?
The news about Nordea in laying off people and shutting down the offices are unpleasant and sad. In the same time these news are just common for today`s atmosphere. It`s almost funny how Nordea, for example, tries to guarantee for the media and customers how they are working always humane way and how “laying off people will make their customer relationships better”. I think these statements are nonsense, but part of the game, of course.
An organization is on purpose to make profit. Always! In the field of social responsibility, every “player” has to do something for it, if they want to “stay alive” and keep on doing business. One example of following social responsibility-rules is an article about Nordea`s attendance on Earth Hour. Earth Hour is a worldwide event, with the idea of switching off the lights for one hour. And this is done for the lighter future. Our team thinks that one hour is not much in the long run. It`s almost
The point here is to pay attention for social responsibility and how it`s fulfilled. The biggest problem is, from our viewpoint, that the acts for social responsibility is done for the sake of social responsibility-system and the reputation. It shouldn`t be like that. The starting point should be the earth, sustainable development and better society. When every single human and organization does the best he can, it`s enough. But it`s a long distance there.
We chose Nokia to be our subject. Nokia uses plastic material in phones and it’s not very environmental friendly. We think that in the future should be developed hard plastic into something that could be recycled. Nokia has a recycling program for phones, but it doesn’t cover plastic. Nokia is constantly searching for new ideas for develop recycling, reusing, transporting and repairing. It is said in Nokia’s websites that they take care of their staff, their health, safety and wellness.
We also think that it is great that Nokia has the recycling program and that they try so hard to be as ecological as possible. But it is just like that you say, the plastic waste is a big problem. Nevertheless we think that it’s very hard to find some other material which can be used in the same way and is as light as plastic. To be honest I think that there would be some more ecological alternative but plastic is much cheaper.
Nokia says on their website that "every single device is made of the environmental in mind" we think that is great but is that realle entirely true? we think it's fantastic that when you are buying new phone you can download every phones "Eco profile" There is very detail information how the phone is made and what materials have been used. You can also see energy efficiency from there. These are small things but I think that small things also matter. We consumers can think more what we are buying and if we want to consider environmental matters Nokia has made it absolutely easy for us!
Nokia still uses plastic materials too but they are definitely on their way for more and more environmental friendly business. From 30 to 26 are the most environmetally friendly phone manufactured by Nokia!
We would like to comment on your recycling idea. Where did you find out that Nokia’s recycling program doesn’t cover plastic? With few clicks on the Nokia CSR-page we found that “100% of the materials in Nokia appliances are recyclable and materials can then be made into for example music and kitchen appliances and even park benches”( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0Zz8m47lW8 ). They also have a application on their page for finding the closest recycling centre to you.
It’s not self-evident that one company works as socially responsible way as Nokia. Big companies can learn much from Nokia and their aspiration of being one of the leading companies in reducing negative environmental effects.
The today`s situation of Nokia is kind of bad. People are fired, the factorys are moved to the third world and the most important, Apple is doing the business better. Nokia lead the development in the 1990s but after that Apple has risen and override Nokia`s selection with innovations. And the story continues.
I think Nokia should stop copying the products from Apple and sit down and think the strategy. My solution is to take the well implemented social responsibility and turn it to a brand. I mean I`m dead sure that I didin`t know about Nokia`s awarness. That`s why it should be told to everyone via advertisement and products itself. This could make Nokia to try even harder for social responsibility, as well.
After we browsed trough Finnair's Corporate Responsibility report, we had bitter aftertaste when it comes to the company's personnel policy. Finnair highlights on the front page of their CSR-pages that they are "a trustworthy, equal and fair employer." Sounds good, but the press history tells a different story. Outsourcing has been in fashion in Finnair. Few years ago they outsourced their two major profit sectors, Finnair Northport Ground handling and Finnair Cargo, without even telling the staff in advance that negotiations were underway. This struck heavily to the ground handling staff which immediately went on strike which then affected on thousands of travelers. Our Teams idea is that Finnair management should be more open both in external and internal communication. Employees must have a constant awareness if their jobs are on the line. Also cutting incentive programs among long term employees when outsourcing from from one....
Like in every company, fluent internal communication improves well-being as well as motivation at work. Also the fact that an employee is satisfied with their work increases production. We think that every job seems different whether you ask the management or employees. It's also quite interesting on what basis a company claims that they're trustworthy, equal etc. Our suggestion is that Finnair should have some kind of an anonymous feedback system within the company. That way they could get the facts right.
We agree with you that Finnair isn't standing behind their words. We mean that they are the opposite being " a thrustworthy, equal and fair employer". But this idea of yours that Finnair's management should be more open both in external and internal communication. It sounds like a good idea, but how are they supposed to do it? Do you just mean that companies like Finnair should tell more open about it? We think it's a good idea to inform about changes in good time before the the employees become unemployed and in our own Massidea we thougt that if they really are laying off people that they could have a system with other companies that are alike so that the people that are being layed off could find a job faster when they already have the knowledge of doing the work.
We think that Finnair is very challenging place to work. Employees must feel a lot of presure from the management. It propably is very stressful that employee doesn´t know what is going to happen in the future. Next week in their jobs everything could be upside down.
Our team found some interesting material on Finnairs website about their corporate responsibility. Finnair already gives the opportunity for Plus One customers to donate their bonus points to charity (University Children's Hospitals and the Baltic sea action group). This got our team thinking if this oppurtunity could be for everyone who uses Finnairs services and not just for those who have the Plus One customership.
For example, Finnair could arange different kind of charity campaigns where the regular customers could donate part of the ticket's price to a charity organization they wish. Customers could either choose the charity organization by themselves or depending on where they fly, the donations would go to destination's organization....
Our team also think that your idea is very good. It would be good if regular customers could donate part of the ticket`s price to a charity organization they wish. Then everyone would have the opportunity to be involved in doing a good job.The donation does not have to be large, even a small amount of money could help.
Our team thinks that this is very good idea. Everyone should have the possibility to be a part of this charity project. Although it is great that Finnair has joined this kind of project. Always have to start from beginning to achieve something.
What you guys are suggesting is a good idea but maybe a bit far fetched. First of all it could be hard to manage such a big sector of different charity organizations, so why not co-operate with few major ones? UNICEF is already an annual partner: every passenger can donate few extra coins into a collection envelope in their seat pocket which are collected by flight-attendants. Maybe this tactic could be implemented into one or two other charities, so the donation chain is wider but at the time easier to handle.
This envelope is a well working idea as it gives one the opportunity to give away coins and do something good. Some airlines do use it already. It could be developed a little further and advertised for expample in those magazines in front of every seat or already in the website. This way every passanger will hear about this envelope and is able to participate.
They aim to be very eco-friendly and I feel that is very vital for them. These issues can give the consumers added value for Finnairs services. Who would not want to be eco-friedly when flying?
I do not know how the workers are treated at Finnair but I assume that much better than in cheap flight companies. There has been a lot of discussion about the those. I think that Finnair has really invested on their staffs education and they are all the time trying to make their customer service even better. They are co-operating with some HR-companies and trying to make their policies even better.
Honour for Finnair!
It's great that Finnair is looking for a socially resonsible image and tries to operate in consent with sustainable development, especially concerning the environment.
I think that an important part of social responsibility for a company in the service-sector is good customer management. In this area Finnair has a lot to improve regarding customer service.
To contact Finnair, you have to fill in a feedback form on their website. Sending the feedback you get an automatic reply, without anyone reviewing your case. When calling Finnair they have separate numbers for ordinary customers and for Finnair plus, Finnair plus gold, Finnair plus platinum members, which puts the customers in an unfair position. In addition calling costs 3,15 euros.
After-sales is a part of responsible business, and this example shows that Finnair failed to meet the expectations on this part.
I was looking very closely to Nordeas webpage but I didn't find anything that would have impressed me. It is great that they support Finnish art and culture. It just feels that everyone does that nowadays. I begin to think that do they support because they truly want or just because it is socially acceptable?
Nordea has had very large laying off-talks. Their target was to decrease their staff. Altogether 2000 people and in Finland 500-600 (in the years of 2011-2012). Seems quite a lot and I hope that the staff is treated right!
However as a Finn, it’s hard not to bypass the recent news telling about the layoffs in Salo. Over a thousand people lost their job. In Salo Nokia is the biggest employer so it’s hard to imagine that this layoff wouldn’t have any effect. Companies
However Nokia has made a sustainability report in year 2010. In this report there are multiple pages of how Nokia is taking care of its employees. For example Nokia has plans for training and developing their employees skills. I was wondering if Nokia could do the same, as I already before suggested for Finnair, that they could arrange some channel for their employees for getting better jobs in the future. This channel would help in case of lay offs. Employees could find new jobs easier and also these jobs might be within Nokia. Most important thing for me within an organization is to take care of its employees, without them there would be any organization.
They should make sure that their workers will be able to get a new work. It is true that the workers are the companies asset. I am sure that Nokia has co-operated with some HR-company during the lay offs. That way they are ensuring that everyone will find their place in the future.
I know the biggest environmental problem when it comes to airplanes is the fuel, but I think it is great Finnair is also thinking about solutions to problems that are maybe less obvious but just as important.
Now that it's proven that decreasing emissions is possible and very beneficial could there be some now rules and regulatioas that insists other aviation companies to act in the same socially responsible way as Finnair does...
But I'm impressed too that they have thought about these things so deeply in Finnair, and that they ae proud to be socially responcible, I just want to see it really happen.
Another issue Finnair has, in my opinion, is that they have been cutting a lot of employees. I also heard that they have been keeping their employees on their toes by telling there will be cuts but not telling when or how much which I think is unfair to the employees.
When Finnair does everything well as it could and even more, they fly with empty planes. The web site says that the routes and schedules are well formed. That`s not true, if the planes are empty but I think the reason is the price. Finnair`s tickets costs always or almost the biggest price. Finnair`s strategy says that awarness in the long run is the base of the business. I think that`s more than true, but it has a big price.
The solution is not to be lower environment friendly. The solution is the Emissions trade and things like that. I think there is acknowledgement for good guy!
So Finnair is doing everything in the right way. Now the other airlines have to be pushed to act the same way. This means higher prices for the consumer, but that`s the only option in the long run. Also emission trade is good tool on the way to better future
They had charity collecting in this project and I think it was very well organized. People could have donated any currency they had. In addition people could have donated even their Finnair Plus –points. I think the collecting was very innovative and suitable to Finnair, because it is so international company.
Keeping it simple and easy is usually more beneficial than trying to do everything really special and extraordinary.
When companies have outsourced employees, they have transferred employees to work in similar companies. When the company outsources services the employee who already has the experience and the education for the job can be moved to the new company. Our groups idea is that companies could cooperate and incase of layoffs. They could create a system where the layoff person can be transferred or gain easier opportunities when applying for a new job. The companies could take responsibility by trying to ensure that the layoff person has a job in the future. This idea would be socially responsible because then there wouldn’t be so many unemployed persons that the government has to take care of.
The idea is really good but we don't think that it is going to work. Just think about it, why the company outsources the services. Because the personel costs are too high. So even if the company has a new job for the layoff people, they will probably paid low wages or they get only short-term contract. Then they will be unemployed again.
We don't really agree with this. In our opinion it's not company's job to provide jobs after they have fired a person. There are already inside networks existing inside companies for workers to look for a job. Not a lot of companies have enough time or money to take care of workers they are going to fire. And company's main purpose is not to offer job for people, it's to make profit. Even if the idea sounds fairly nice, I don't think it's very practical.
One of our teachers once told us that there's a company, where the average age of the workers was around 30. That's because the employees never stay in the company for longer than 5 or 6 years. I think it could be possible to use this kind of rotation together with your idea: the point would be to create a similar company to the originals and let the fired employees work there until they find a better place. The would be rotation on the workers. There would always a place for a new employee, since the old ones leave within few years.
We agree of your idea of transferring employees to new jobs. Since all big companies like Nokia are outsourcing thousands of people aiming to reduce their costs they could also take serious responsibility of those unemployed workers. Relocation of workers is very important if company wants to act socially responsibly. If companies would relocate their workers it would make them more humane and seductive. Outsourcings concern thousands of people every year and those workers who stay in the company will have more tasks for them. We don’t consider that as very humanity managing.
Big companys need to try to be social responsibile because they need investors and investors want to get a good reputation when they putting they money some companys. So it is hart to know if the companys really want to make changes or just getting the money for the investors.
But it is nice to read about these things now and learn more about the good and socially responsible things that these corporate´s have done.