The First Nations Land Management Act, enacted in 1999, gives First Nations certain powers in the management of reserve lands, resources and the environment. The example would be UBC golf course. UBC is also involved in working with Musqueam under the Musqueam Development Committee which requires UBC to invest great amount of money. First Nations not only own some land in UBC but also many other lands such as the Bridgeport casino land and the Jericho lands.

Since great amount of lands are fully or partially owned by the First Nations here in Vancouver, it affects businesses in a way that they would have to check if the land is owned by them when establishing businesses. If it is, then they either have to find another land or have to come up with some kind of agreements with the First Nations. How UBC has been working with the First Nations as a business partner shows how the First Nations partnership can impact one organization’s business model. In this case, UBC’s aboriginal programs and reserving their culture on campus take up a quite big part of UBC’s business. Even though it might cost quite a bit for an organization to operate under this condition, they have to take their relationship with the First Nations into consideration when building a business in BC, Canada.

References:

http://www.firstnationsdrum.com/2008/03/musqueam-settles-with-province-in-landmark-deal/

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/background-the-indian-act-1.1056988

http://news.ubc.ca/2006/12/21/archive-media-releases-2006-mr-06-132/

A Muslim teenager, Samantha Elauf argued that she was denied a job because she was wearing headscarf for her religious purpose which is against the company’s dress code. She won this case after all and was awarded $20,000 in damages.

This case shows one of the ethical issues the company has to deal with. It is unfair to deny hiring people because of the religious reasons, however, the company also has to think about following their rules and keeping their brand image while not-abusing anyone’s rights. In this case, Samantha definitely has a right to show her religious beliefs in any ways, but the company also has to apply their dress code equally to all employees. If the company admits one exemption, they are going to have to admit other exemptions as well which might make their dress code meaningless and break the brand image. However, I believe that the company could have discussed this issue with her before denying her job. It is unfair that Samantha got denied a job just because of her headscarf even though she had a high-score at her interview. The way the company coped with this issue was disrespectful and rude. One thing the company can do is to go over their policy again and alternate it if needed to make sure that nobody’s rights would be violated by them. It might be challenging, but this is going to benefit the company in a long run.

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-29466083