Whistle-Blowing In The Workplace Essay

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:

According to Harvard Law School’s article, approximately two-thirds of companies in the U.S. are affected by fraud. However, whistleblower Hotline can be as defense against management overrides. The article noted that whistleblower could be more effective if it become as apart of the corporate compliance programs and a reward of any monetary sanctions collected to motivate the employees Also, the article mention that the employees

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

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

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

Hayley, I absolutely agree with you. Each individual must make his or her own decision as to whether the disturbing unethical offense is worth the personal cost (Reece 2014, pg 111). When I was personal faced with trying to decide to whistle blow or keep quiet and do nothing at all; I had to tell. I tried to just keep my head down and be silent but, the silence was literally making me sick. I couldn’t eat, I couldn’t sleep, and what I knew was constantly on my mind, I felt like I couldn’t function properly. The reason I was unable to function was because not being honest was not in my charter. I made the decision to be the whistleblower, and yes I did receive some back lash but for me that was better than the silence. Every individual is different,

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).

addition, as a leader, when a whistleblower reports activity to you, first gather all of the

The act of whistleblowing refers to any instance wherein a member of an organization, or even a former member, tells another individual into some immoral or illegal activities of the organization to the hope that the individual will do something in order to change the practice (Near and Miceli n.p.). The individual who reports the misconduct of the organization is known as the whistleblower. The fact that different intelligence agencies were receiving different whistleblower cases, the Congress passed the Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989 in order to serve and protect the whistleblowers. However, the stated act is not applicable to anyone who is working in intelligence organizations since they have their Intelligence Community Whistleblower

Waring, J. (2016). When whistle-blowers become the story: The problem of the 'third victim': Comment on "cultures of silence and cultures of voice: The role of whistleblowing in healthcare organisations". International Journal of Health Policy and Management, 5(2), 133-135.

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?

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?