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
Duska argues that whistleblowing is always justified. He claims that employees do “not have an obligation of loyalty to a company, even a prima facie one, because companies are not the kind of things that are properly objects of loyalty” (Duska, pg. 424). Duska denies one of Bok’s key conditions to blow the whistle, loyalty. This is because Duska sees the purpose of business is to produce goods and services and to make a profit. Duska’s view of a business’s purpose prevents the company, or in Case C the university, from becoming an object deserving of loyalty.
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
You are protected under the law if you reveal to those in positions of authority, or 'blow the whistle on' suspected malpractice at work. It is in the public interest that the law protects whistleblowers so that they can speak out if they find malpractice in an organisation. Blowing the whistle is more formally known as 'making a disclosure in the public interest' so it is important you can do so knowing that you are protected from losing your job or being victimised as a result of what you have uncovered and made public.safe.
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
During the G20 summit in Seoul 2010, the whistleblower protection law was evaluated across the countries and Australia was one of the highly rated countries with US and Canada in the public sector (Wolfe. 2014, p. 4). On the contrary, the level of whistleblower protection in the private sector is found weaker than the public sector (Wolfe. 2014, p. 4). This report critically examines the current protection regime in both public and private sectors and depicts the lives of whistleblowers after disclosing the wrongdoings of the organisation to our society. Despite the legislative requirement to establish stronger whistleblower protection law in Australia, it is not applied
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
You’re right Timothy. But sometimes it takes more courage for the employees to speak up about unethical conduct of their superiors. Probably because they’re afraid of being retaliated like getting fired from work or demoted. Nevertheless there are laws like Sarbanes-Oxley of 2002 and Dodd-Frank (Section 922) that would protect whistleblowers from the retaliation of their employers and even reward if the whistleblowers can provide the original information to the SEC .
A major issue in the United States is gun control. Due to multiple mass shootings in schools and public areas, restrictions regarding guns have been implemented across the United States. Andrew Parks, a student at The University of Alabama, wrote an article against gun restrictions. His article, “The University should allow concealed carry,” supports the idea of college campuses like The University of Alabama, allowing students to conceal carry firearms. In an article written by Jennie Kushner, the opinions of students on the University of Alabama’s Police Department’s gun policy are presented. The safety of student body relies on the students’ feeling safe. That safety comes from less gun control laws and policies on campus. Each of the articles stated provides information against gun control in different ways.
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).
Whistleblowing- It is designed to proper employees from being victimised by their employer, so they will “blow the whistle” on wrong doing. Work places try to create an environment which enables staff to raise whatever concerns they have. Staff are assured if they raise a genuine concerns under this policy they will not be at risk of punitive action being taken against them. However this doesn’t not cover people who maliciously raise an issue that they know not to be true. An employee can make a disclosure based
It is more reasonable to utilize the death penalty than to abolish it. The death penalty should not be abolished because (1) it deters people from committing murder and (2) because the death penalty gives peace of mind to the victims and their families and puts an end to the crime.
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?
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
Guntar Prangel founded Mountain Man Brewing Company (MMBC) in 1925 with roots all the way from Bavaria. They distinctively use specialized hops and uncommon strains of barley to create a beer that has been described as “strong”, robust and flavorful. With revenues of $50 million in 2005, MMBC had sold 520,000 barrels of their larger to distributors in West Virginia, Illinois, Michigan, and Ohio. The brand mostly appealed to their core drinker segments that are blue collar, middle to lower income men who are over the age 45, which is different than other competitor’s market segments.