The above article from March, 2011, discusses the appropriateness of American Apparels’ work culture. While the company’s CEO, Dov Charney promotes sexual freedom in the workplace, believing that ‘it’s a First Amendment right to pursue one’s affection for another human being’, many of the employees disagree. As Charney argues, his philosophy of sexual creativity is closely associated with stimulating creative energy. However the line between energy stimulation and sexual harassment seems to be too thin for many workers. As a consequence an ex-employee field a suit against the company, requesting a compensation of $250 million. In late 2011, another suit was filed, once again for sexual harassment.

 
The ethical issue of potential sexual harassment, arises from a stakeholder conflict and the work culture of the company. As the CEO uses ‘sexy marketing’ to promote brands unique USP (noticeable and provocative clothes), he enforces all employees to adapt a specific mindset. As a result, the stores are often perceived as appealing and attractive by the customers, yet not all employees are comfortable with the sexual freedom promoted by the brand at the workplace.

The ethical issue of sexual harassment at the workplace has stimulated a debate, as the CEO believes that retaining it is the key to an increase in sales, while the board of directors is becoming increasingly worried about the potential legal consequences. Whether or not American Apparel’s sexual freedom is beneficial or potentially threatening is to be determined.

O’Brien, Gael, 3/15/2011, ‘American Apparel and the Ethics of a Sexually Charged Workplace’. http://business-ethics.com/2011/03/15/0852-american-apparel-and-the-ethics-of-a-sexually-charged-workplace/