Corporate Greed vs Corporate Responsibility

Business is allowed to make profit.

That is the point of business.

But there is a difference between profit and greed.

Profit is a business succeeding.

Greed is a business succeeding while making life worse for the society that supports it.

Corporate greed appears when companies raise prices simply because they can.

It appears when automation replaces workers but the savings never reach customers.

It appears when jobs are sent offshore while Australian customers continue funding the company.

It appears when call centres are understaffed because waiting customers are cheaper than hiring workers.

It appears when a company removes services but keeps charging as though the product is the same.

Banks are a good example.

Many people originally signed up to banks that had branches, ATMs and phone support.

That was the product.

You could walk into a branch.

You could access cash.

You could call someone.

Now branches close.

ATMs disappear.

Phone lines become harder.

Customers are pushed into apps.

But the product has changed.

The customer did not necessarily agree to that social downgrade.

They signed up to a bank with human access, and over time the bank quietly became a digital gatekeeper.

That matters.

Especially for older people.

Especially for vulnerable people.

Especially for people who are not confident online.

Technology should improve service.

It should not be used as an excuse to remove service.

The same applies to offshoring.

When companies move call centres overseas, they may reduce costs internally, but Australia loses jobs.

Those workers once earned Australian wages.

They spent money in Australian shops.

They paid Australian tax.

They contributed to the local economy.

When those jobs are removed, the company may become more profitable, but the country becomes weaker.

Then governments talk about unemployment as though it is separate.

It is not separate.

Corporate decisions shape national outcomes.

If companies benefit from Australian customers, there should be some responsibility to Australian employment, Australian service standards and Australian economic participation.

Technology also needs to be handled responsibly.

If a company uses automation to replace workers, the long-term benefit should not only go to executives and shareholders.

It should reduce prices.

It should improve services.

It should create new roles.

It should help transition workers.

It should not simply be a machine that turns wages into profit.

There should be a duty of care when companies restructure.

If someone has given years of work to a business, they should not be treated like a deleted spreadsheet row.

Retrenchment can destroy people.

It can affect mental health.

It can lead to addiction.

It can break families.

It can create long-term instability.

A society that cares about work should also care about what happens when work disappears.

We have performance reviews.

HR policies.

Workplace rules.

Training requirements.

Conduct standards.

But where is the serious follow-up when people are pushed out of employment?

Where is the welfare responsibility from corporations that profited from those workers?

Where is the government expectation that transition plans are not optional?

If a company can plan profits five years ahead, it can plan worker responsibility too.