Best Argument For Whistleblowing In The Workplace

Whistle blowing does take courage. There is the risk of being bullied or harassed as a result, but anyone who whistle blows has the right to protection from the person they have raised concerns about. If you suffer as a result of a whistle blowing incident the UK Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998 offers legal protection.

In addition, whistleblowers should be portrayed as being good in order for society to begin seeing them in a positive way. Furthermore, the government should make this type of crimes a public matter. Allowing the public to be able to see all charges and outcome regarding these cases could bring out other wrongdoings in other organizations. The government should also impose greater punishment such as jail time for these types of crimes rather than imposing fines that they are able to

For many whistleblowers, fear of persecution and retaliation has prevented them from speaking out against improper behaviors at their institutions. Because of the dangers that whistleblowers are exposed to, many companies have become proactive in promoting and protecting whistleblowing. As a case and point, we need to look no further than the banking giant, Barclays.

Review “Just pucker and blow: An analysis of corporate whistleblowers” in Chapter 2. Please respond to the following:

A whistleblower is a person who raises a concern about a wrongdoing in their workplace or within the NHS or social care setting. If a person wishes to raise their concerns they should obtain a

In most every profession, there may be situations where a whistleblowing situation could arise, my profession of education is no different. A professional educator, such as myself, may be put into a situation where they have to decide if they are going to “blow the whistle” on unjust actions, or if they are going to ignore the actions because of their loyalty to their school district and their colleagues. A possible example of this conflict that could occur in my profession is if a teacher is compromising the confidentiality of student’s privacy and another teacher if aware of this action. The teacher aware of the action has to decide if they want to “blow the whistle” on the situation, and risk the potential consequences of turning in a colleague. Or the teacher can ignore the situation and continue to all the compromising of as student’s confidential information.

What is the explanation of the standard view on whistleblowing presented by Sissela Bok and reported by Robert Larmer in his article?

Although many see it as a solution to keeping government surveillance in check, whistleblowing only alerts citizens to the problem. Chuck McCutcheon agrees with this claim in his article titled “Whistleblowers.” In the article, McCutcheon maintains that “there is a trend toward greater public support for whistleblowing and a stronger sense that whistleblowers should be supported, rather than it just being assumed that they are always destined to suffer as martyrs” (2). In other words, McCutcheon believes that whistleblowers only have the potential to start

Jackson and Raftos (1997) referred to whistle blowing as an avenue of last resort. Employees find themselves in these situations when the authorities at their organisations have failed to take actions on reported issues affecting that organisation. Wimot (2000) likened whistleblowing to a spectrum. At one end of this spectrum whistleblowing would only cause minimal pain and scars on the stakeholders and organisation while on the other end is the worst scenario where the whistleblowing effects are turbulent and often experienced to be negative to all those involved (ibid).

A Whistleblower is defined as an employee who submits a law infraction by their company, to the employer or to the Federal government and where the infraction could be sexual harassment toward the reporting employee or a public policy violation such as unlawfully keeping an employee from preforming their civic duty as on a jury ("Whistleblower Protections - FindLaw," n.d.). The U.S. government as well as numerous states have enacted statues to protect whistleblowers from an employer’s retribution for claim or violation report submissions

A person who uncovered any kind of details or facts that is unlawful, illicit, criminal, dishonest or incorrect within any corporation is known as whistleblower. A whistleblower has two options to bring information or accusation to surface by internally or externally. Internally, a whistleblower can lead his/her statement to awareness of other people within the accused corporation. Externally, a whistle-blower can also contact a third party outside of the corporation such as media.

Companies in today’s society are often required to abide by an abundant amount of rules and regulations imposed upon them which stem from government and law enforcement authority. In analyzing the Case of “The Reluctant Security Guard” we will examine the decision making process which led to David Tuff effectively ‘whistle blowing’ for what he felt was the right thing to do.

Over the last forty years this country has seen an increase in corruption and greed both within the corporate world as well as within our own government. Since that time Whistleblowing, or the deliberate non-obligatory act of disclosure, which gets onto public record and is made by a person who has or had privileged access to data or information of an organization, about non-trivial illegality or other wrongdoing whether actual, suspected or anticipated which implicates and is under control of that organization, to an external entity having potential to rectify the wrongdoing.1 Both federal and state statutes and regulations have been created to protect these individuals from various forms of retaliation. Even without a statute,

Whistleblowers perform in many careers and are found at all levels of an organization: scientists and secretaries, lawyers and paralegals, managers and staff, security personnel and computer specialists, etc. They are as varied in age, ethnic background, education, profession, sex, and income as the population at large.

2. What measures can and should be taken to make it easier for corporate employees to ‘‘blow the whistle’’ on a fraudulent scheme they uncovered within the firm?