Collaborative learning: Constructing Stakeholder Debates

1. Collaborative learning: Constructing Stakeholder Debates Gwen Alexis, Ph.D. , J.D. Associate Professor Leon Hess Business School galexis@monmouth.edu Collaborative Teaching and Learning Track LeBow Business Professors Teaching Summit, Drexel University Philadelphia, PA - May 17, 2013

2. Why is there a Need for Group Work Assignments? • Most Business School students will spend a portion of their career in a corporate work environment • Team Work is important in corporate setting; hence Group Work should be an important component of overall course grade (e.g., 20%) • High Degree of Diversity in today’s workplace makes it important to teach students to work with others not of their choosing. • Hence, the instructor should assign students to groups consisting of 4-5 students (avoid all-male or all-female groups) • Give the groups time on the first day of class to exchange e-mails and phone numbers so that they can coordinate working outside of class on group projects

3. Why use Debate Format? • To combat perennial problem of “Free Rider” and “Lone Ranger” associated with group work • Assign each group a stakeholder role based upon the primary stakeholders in the issue being debated • Each member of the group must speak during the debate (no spokespersons!) • No one wants to be embarrassed by presenting redundant material that does not contribute to the group’s position in the debate thus students themselveese sense need to collaborate • Debates engender a spirit of competition so that students feel vested in the learning experience (they want to win the debate!)

4. SCOTUS BLOG IS A GOOD SOURCE FOR DEBATE MATERIAL Oral Argument for Respondent EMA http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/296438-1 Respondent’s Attorney Paul Smith, Esq. starts at 26:05

5. Justice Scalia and Kagan pose Questions http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CFX6kvpRbq4 (1.5 minutes) • Brown vs. EMA http://www.oyez.org/cases/2010-2019/2010/2010_08_1448#argument

6. Should ATCA be Applied to Corporations?Oral Argument Heard by U.S. Supreme Court on October 12, 2012 ATCA Sweatshop Labor Human Rights Abuses Environmental Degradation Alien Tort Claims Act (ATCA)

7. 3 Jurisdictional Requirements of ATCA Lawsuit • An alien plaintiff (filed by NGO in name of plaintiff) • Victim of a tort (civil wrong or injury) • Violation of a law of nations • UN Declaration of Human Rights • UN Declaration on Environment and Development • Montreal Protocol (reduce CFCs) • UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) • Sarei v. Rio Tinto, PLC, 456 F.3d 1069 (9th Cir. 2006) • Declaration of the UN Conference on the Human Environment

8. NGOs find the Alien Tort Claims Act (ATCA) to be a useful tool in fulfilling their missions. Alien Tort Claims Act (ATCA) 28 U.S.C. §1350 “The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any civil action by an alien for a tort only, committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States.” “ATCA provides remedies for earth rights abuses around the world.” EarthRights International (ERI) has filed amicus briefs with CCR, ILO and the EarthJustice Legal Defense Fund .

9. Assignment for All Groups • (a) Take a position consistent with your assigned role as to whether ATCA should be applied to corporations; and (b) Prepare a well-reasoned argument justifying your position. • Prepare a defense of your position as the right choice in each of the six ATCA cases listed on the next slide. (That is to say, you are to reaffirm that ATCA should or should not be used against corporations in the six cases listed.) • Helpful Suggestion: In mounting the defense of your position, each group is allowed to draw a distinction between applying ATCA to U.S. multinational corporations (in contrast to applying ATCA to all MNCs). But, be careful if you exercise this option because, you must in all events make logical, well-reasoned and empirically sustainable arguments for such a distinction to be drawn.

10. Assigned Roles Group 1 – International Rights Advocates (comprised of former lawyers of the International Labor Rights Fund). IR Advocates have several ATCA cases pending. Learn about this group and their cases at: http://www.iradvocates.org/cases.html Group 2 – U.S. Chamber of Commerce. The Chamber is a venerable advocate for U.S. business interests. See what the Chamber said about ATCA litigation in 2009: http://www.uschamber.com/press/releases/2009/august/us-chamber-applauds-eleventh-circuits-dismissal-alien-tort-statute-lawsui Group 3 – Residents of Less Developed Nations (LDNs) about whom it has been said: People living in LDNs increasingly look to NGOs for ‘Global Governance’ as they have no confidence in the ability of their own governments or intergovernmental organizations like the UN, WTO, World Bank and the IMF to ‘ride herd over’ powerful MNCs. …. BM 515 PowerPoint Slides, Week 1, Slide 6, “The NGOization of the global public policy arena” Group 4 – The American people in all their messiness – avid environmentalists, doubters of the “Global Warming Thesis,” bleeding heart liberals, die-hard devotees of “the invisible hand ,“ followers of the late Economist Milton Friedman (There is one and only one social responsibility of business – to use its resources and engage in activities to increase its profits so long as it stays within the rules of the game.), Fox News aficionados, members of the socially conscious 60’s generation, victims of outsourcing (i.e., unemployed and underemployed workers), gainfully employed laborers and professionals, college students against sweatshop labor, human rights activists, Democrats, Republicans, Tea Party members, etc. Group 4, despite your diversity, you are expected to reach a consensus among your members in order to present a united front! Group 5 – Third World Governments; i.e., the governments of the LDNs in which the residents of Group 3 reside. These governments are eager for the foreign direct investment (FDI) of outsourcing MNCs. Accordingly, their laws protecting laborers and the environment are weak or non-existent at the present time.

11. Pending, Settled, or Dismissed ATCA Cases • Unocal/Chevron Settlement – See “Coming Home to Roost” (pp. 62-66) and the following websites for background: • http://www.iradvocates.org/unocal.html • http://www.chevron.com/chevron/pressreleases/article/03212005_settlementreachedinyadanapipelinelawsuit.news • Liz Claiborne Settlement – Read p. 64 of “Coming Home to Roost”. • ExxonMobil – Read “Summary” contained on following webpage: • http://www.iradvocates.org/exxoncase.html • Nestlé's – See following website and read “Summary” on that page as well as the “Complaint,” for which there is a link on that page: • http://www.iradvocates.org/nestlecase.html • Coca-Cola – Read “Summary” and visit KillerCoke.org link contained on following webpage: • http://www.iradvocates.org/coke1case.html • Environmental Lawsuits in which EarthRights International (ERI) filed Amicus Curiae Briefs – Read pp. 8-12 of “Global Polluters and Transnational Watchdogs” on eCampus (Week 2 Reading Assignment)

12. The End! • Questions?Comments?