The Reluctant Security Guard Essay

875 Words4 Pages
The Reluctant Security Guard 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. The policy that was in place for David Tuff was ultimately an oath he subscribed to when he became a security guard, as well as his integrity of being a former U.S. Marine. He was required to abide by the Security Officer’s Manual, which included obeying the rules and regulations of the Superintendent of Police. There is no ambiguity…show more content…
Are the reasons for whistle blowing in line with reasons everyone can act upon in principle alone? Tuff met with two other security guards regarding the overall issues, they concurred with him that they too had grievances against the company policies. This act promotes the concept of universalizability, and how it can be applied to the moral dilemma that Tuff faced. He now had people on his side, this allowed him to gain emotional momentum which led him to speaking to the press shortly after he met with his co-workers. As far as reversibility applies to this examination, we could deduce that Tuff felt that his actions would be just in that it would apply to him if the table was turned and he was an innocent bystander waiting to bit hit by a drunk driver. Reversibility leads us to challenge the amount of moral worth in the sense of duty that Tuff had to his oath, and to society. There is no doubt Tuff felt that his duties as a U.S. Marine Corps veteran and a sworn in security guard outweighed the conduct and vision of the policy makers at the Blue Mountain Company. An argument can be made that whistle blowing should only be warranted when there is a group or a majority that feels something should be brought to the attention of an outside authority if deemed so. As discussed in the study the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) determined that since his actions were not a concerted effort among him and his colleagues, the
Open Document