I heartily endorse this perspective on philanthropy made by Forbes back in 1917. They re-ran it as part of a 90th anniversary issue.
Too few millionaires who aspire to win fame as philanthropists begin at home, among their own workers. To grind employees and then donate a million dollars to perpetuate his name is not a particularly laudable record for any man to live or to leave behind him. Of course, it is more spectacular, it makes more of a splash to do the grandiose act in sight of all men, where it will be read of and talked of. But it is rather a pitiable form of philanthropy. Individuals like George Eastman and John N. Patterson, both employing thousands of men, who take deep personal interest in the happiness of their workers and spend money freely in furtherance of it, will by and by come into their own.
I might add that gaining your money via dishonest competition would fall into the same category.
Treating employees right (and everyone else, for that matter) isn’t a barrier to long-term success, it is a catalyst.