The Ethics Of Whistle Blowing Essay

In every setting there should be a policy and procedures on whistle blowing. The whistle blowing Policy is put into place to provide protection against the person in the work place against victimisation or any form of punishment (physical or verbal) when concerns are genuine. If you suffer any victimisation or punishment due to whistleblowing you may be able to take your case to an Employment Tribunal. If you have any concerns about misconduct or malpractice that is occurring in your work setting you should report it to your manager/supervisor. All information given is confidential. The whistleblower is a person that discloses wrongdoing that threatens others, rather than a complaint about their own treatment.

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.

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

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

Whistleblowing encourages and enables employees to raise serious concerns within the company rather than overlooking a problem or 'blowing the whistle' outside. Employees are advised to speak to their designated senior CareGiver or a member of the

The various forms of retribution that whistle-blowers endure at the hands of employers both financially and psychologically for attempting to correct mismanagement, fraud, and dishonesty are often too much for the whistle-blower to bear. Careers are in jeopardy because individuals with strong ethics decide to pursue law suits against their employers. One example is where the US Forest Service employees found their careers ruined by either demotions or loss of jobs when caught speaking out in favor of the environment or sound science, or when

Whistle blowing in organizations can be an outstanding source of needed information to the organization. On the other side, that same information that is delivered can have a negative effect on the employee that has decided to take matters in to their own hands and inform management of potential unethical behavior. An article called “Nonprofit whistle-blower employee nets $1.6 million retaliation award” written by Tricia Gorman is in reference to an employee whistle-blower that her place of employment violated the New Jersey Conscientious Employee Protection Act, which is part of the organizations policy for hostile work environment.

In an age when accelerated communications contribute to growing perceptions of organizational improprieties, the ethical and legal implications of whistleblowing have become a major topic of discussion. According to Lawrence and Weber (2014), whistleblowing is an employee disclosing apparent organizational misconduct to the government or media; however, this reporting of information should come after attempts at going through proper channels in order to persuade the organization to take appropriate actions has been ineffective.

The article I found by Thompson discusses risk and rewards of whistle blowing, the example used was from 1994 and the CEOs of the seven major American tobacco companies tested before Congress that nicotine was not addictive Shortly afterwards, Jeffrey Wigand, then head of research and development at Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., gave the lie to that, rest in a deposition in a lawsuit brought by the State of Mississippi and then in an interview on 60 Minutes. This resulted in the tobacco companies reaching a $246 billion multistate settlement in 1998. Wigand underwent a smear campaign and said that he and his family received death threats. Whistle blowing ended his marriage. The maverick doesn’t consider himself a hero. He has said, “People were dying. I was loyal to a higher order of ethical responsibility.” The 1999 movie The Insider depicts some of this saga and Wigand now lectures worldwide, offers expertise on tobacco issues, and runs the nonprofit Smoke-Free Kids, Inc.

Several theories indicate why the whistle-blowing process has become more prevalent and characteristics or processes encourage individuals to come forward a report instances of wrongdoing or making organizational behaviors public knowledge (Lennane, 2012). The process of whistle-blowing often involves an individual being conflicted between loyalty to their organization or their belief that they have a responsibility to protect public interest above the practices of their organization (Soma & Nirmala, 2011). Individuals may attempt to initiate

Ms. Williams is a typical of a whistle-blower in the sense that whistle-blowers are willing to face retaliation from their employer. Janet P. Near, a professor at the Kelley School of Business at Indiana University who has studied whistleblowing since 1980 stated that “If they [whistle-blowers] cannot suffer retaliation from their employer, we don’t count them” (Melnick, 2014, para 6). In many specialized industries, everyone knows each other so it is not unusual for whistle-blowers who get fired to have trouble finding work within the same industry. Near indicates that whistle-blowing is less about the psychology of an individual, but more about the severity of the situation unmasked (Melnick, 2014). C. Frederick Alford, political psychology professor and author of Whistleblowers: Broken Lives and Organizational Power stated whistle-blower arrive late at the realization that what people do and what they say are two different things so they are naïve in a certain sense (Melnick, 2014). As a result, they are shocked when they realize people lie, cheat, steal, and whatever (Melnick, 2014). Therefore, Near insists “What seems to predict whether someone will actually blow the whistle is: how serious the wrongdoing is, if they are very sure it happened and so on ... Situational characteristics rather

Whistleblowing is the act that employees commit when they cry foul on their own organization for misdoings, corruption and illegality. I shall argue that whistleblowing in the workplace is “sometimes permissible” in order to keep businesses and corporations in check. I shall do so by presenting the best argument for whistleblowing to be “sometimes permissible” and not “always permissible”.

Well, according to Miceli, Nearand and Dworkin (2008), whistleblowing is an act of revealing wrongdoings in an organization by the former or current employees of the very organization. As such, a whistleblower is an individual who reveals wrongdoings within an organization to the public or the senior management. The key characteristics of a whistleblower include, but are not limited to, dissent, accusation, breach of loyalty, altruism, sportsmanship courtesy, conscientiousness and civic culture (Miceli, Near & Dworkin, 2008).

A whistle-blower is a person who exposes illegal or immoral activity that they have witnessed. This can be knowledge of misused public money, law breaking, unethical actions, or activity that pose risk to public safety. Employees who have witnessed immoral or illegal actions often decide to keep quiet.

The whistleblower him or herself must be carefully scrutinized. What are the personal and the professional reputations of the whistleblower? What is the motive driving the whistleblower? Is it to benefit the client or the organization, or is it a need for attention or revenge? Is the whistleblower's cause seen as legitimate and significant by trustworthy colleagues and friends? Is the whistleblower aware of the potential consequences of blowing the whistle and still willing to accept responsibility for actions taken?