Nonprofit Whistle Blowers

Whistle-blowing is a person who exposes any kind of information or activity that is deemed illegal, unethical or not correct either private or public within an organization or company. When an individual discovers evidence of malpractice or misconduct in an organization he/ she faces an ethical dilemma in which a decision has to be made. Either present documentation or turn the blind eye and not acknowledge the situation. Such information can be classified as a violation of company policy, rules, and regulations or a threat to public interest, national security, as well as fraud and corruption. Those that choose to become whistle-blowers can disclose their information either internal or external.

OSHA implemented the whistleblower provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and 20 other statutes protecting employees who report violations of various airline, commercial motor carrier, consumer product, environmental, financial reform, food safety, health care reform, nuclear, pipeline, public transportation agency, railroad and maritime laws. Under these laws passed by Congress, employers are forbidden from retaliating against employees who raise various protected concerns or provide protected information to the employer or to the government. Employees who believe that they have been retaliated against for engaging in protected conduct

The concept of a whistleblower is that of a person who decides to report unethical or illegal actions of or within their place of employment. From the text, an extension of the previous definition goes on to say, “They may be working for private companies, nonprofit organizations, or for the government. They may disclose information inside or outside their organizations—to supervisors, regulators, or to the media.” (Halbert & Ingulli, 2012, p.47) Based on the definition, anyone of us can be a whistleblower. It doesn’t seem that the information disclosed is limited in anyway. Although, some of the information may not be protected

Unfortunately, as an employee of an organization several years ago I was involved in a whistle blowing the case. I can personally vouch for the fact it is unpleasant at best and quit a headache. My “employer” was violating multiple OSHA and PEOSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration) codes and requirements for training and personal protection. My colleague and I brought these issues to management in a written form on more than one occasion, and we both were promptly removed from the personnel roster without cause. The next several months were meetings, interviews, letters and legal correspondence to prove our case which was ultimately decided in our favor, reinstating us and led to a hefty fine for the agency. This was a volunteer

The fact remains however that a professional in the organization decided to send PHI in an email to a person outside the organization. It is highly doubtful the OCR would consider this disclosure a part of Treatment, Payment or Operations. Even in the event there was a need to share specific information as part of a grievance procedure, there is no reason to include identifiable patient information in such a case.

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.

One example of this is when I tried to bring to Sally Fouhse’s attention that two members of the staff were having an affair together, and she told me not to cause drama. While I am certain that Sally Fouhse is an adequate CFO, she should have never been placed in a HR position. Not only was Sally unavailable for any kind of HR assistance, she, herself, was completely inappropriate in the workplace. Sally did not have the patience to train those whom she was responsible for. She also did not clearly or adequately communicate with those underneath her, and in tense situations, Sally could not control her temper. Sally showed consistently inappropriate behavior to those underneath her and she harassed employees who’s actions she did not agree

Introduction: Agree: “In too many organizations, those who speak unwelcome truths are fired or at least marginalized” (p.xxi). Rationale: I believe that leaders should be able to listen to everyone and everything, no matter how bitter the truth can be. Employees who try to stand against wrong are usually the ones put in trouble or easily fired for little things. I remember a nurse who always stood against the management because they would not listen to her regarding the short staff. When she finally threatened to report the facility, she was easily put in trouble over a small thing and fired. I believe leaders who are in power should not stoop so low and should respect others points of view and encourage others to unite to achieve the goals. Disagree: “One hard-won bit of advice he gives would-be whistle blowers—make sure you have another job lined up first” (p.xxi). Rationale: Whistleblowers play a vital role in exposing corruption, fraud, and mismanagement, and in preventing disasters that arise from negligence or wrongdoing. Whistleblowers who speak out about wrongdoing potentially save lives and resources. I believe that the treatment whistleblowers get is unfair and they should be treated better. Currently, US whistleblower law offers no protection. I believe that people should be able voice out their concerns when something is wrong and not have to worry about being reprimanded. The concept that might be particularly helpful in my personal development as a leader is to

A “whistleblower” is the one who informs against another. The term likely brings to mind famous cases surrounding highly publicized criminal acts, such as Sherron Watkins exposing Enron’s fraudulent stock inflation or even “Deep Throat” revealing details that brought to light the Watergate scandal. These are major cases involving elaborate trials and major media attention, but that’s not how everyday whistleblowing occurs. Although the wrongdoing taking place in various workplaces, agencies, government, and organizations may not constitute large-scale criminal acts, they still pose significant challenges to the potential whistleblower who may feel a moral obligation to report what he or she has witnessed.

Two main terms that will be encountered are whistleblower and loyal employee agent argument. According to (Boatwright, 2012) whistleblowing “is the release of information by a former member or member of an organization”. This means that for whistleblowing to occur there must be a correlation between the blower and the establishment in which the blower sees the company’s methods or practices

As more companies become aware of public corruption, they have taken measures to prevent these crimes from happening. Some companies have put in place many policies to prevent corruption. Things such as codes of conduct, ethics rules, criminal statutes that prevent gift receiving and antifraud policies. Now more businesses and organizations are using the whistleblower system. This system allows anyone who witness an unethical act to report it without fear of retaliation. Sometimes, there is retaliation for being a whistleblower. For instance, a person may in fact receive poor treatment, changes in work hours and they may even experience working in areas or shifts that no one wants. It starts out as good thing but it doesn’t always seem to work in the favor of the whistleblower.

Whistle-blowing is defined as when an employee believes that their employee has done something wrong, or that may be harmful to the public, and they feel obligated to report these actions to the government, media, or higher levels within the organization (Lawrence & Weber, 2014.) This type of reporting of unethical or illegal behavior, seems that it would be a “no brainer” that an employee should in fact, report it to someone. However, our text identifies four main conditions that must be met before an employee is morally justified by informing the government or media:

Internal whistle-blowing within an organization involves over 75 % of employees of wrong doings such as vandalism, absenteeism and damages. Even though several companies detect some misbehavior within the company, whistle-blowing was first presented as an ethical issue over more than 20 years ago. Many

The concept of whistleblowing in modern days differs from citizens to public servants. From citizens’ perspective, this action is perceived positively because it promotes the public good, and for most public servants, this action is perceived negatively because it damages the reputation of the organization and can ultimately jeopardize national security.

Whistle blowing is an endeavor of an employee or previous employee of a company to uncover what he or she accepts to be a wrongdoing in or by a company or association. Whistle blowing tries to make others mindful of practices that are viewed as illicit or immoral. In the event that the wrongdoing is accounted for to somebody in the company it is said to be internal. Internal whistle blowing has a tendency to do less harm to the company. There is additionally external whistle blowing. This is the place the wrongdoing is accounted for to the media and conveyed to the consideration of the general population. This sort of whistle blowing tends to influence the company negatively in view of terrible attention. It is said that whistle blowing is close to home if the wrongdoing influences the whistle blower alone (like sexual badgering), and said to be generic if the wrongdoing influences other individuals. Numerous individuals whistle blow for two fundamental reasons: morality and vengeance.