In Defense of Whistle Blowing

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

The word “whistleblower” defines a person who divulges to another person, in authority or the public, about any alleged illegal activities and dishonest occurrences in a company, private organization, or governmental department.

The misconduct could be a violation of rules, laws or regulation, a fraud, a threat to the public, safety violation, and corrupt dealings. Whistle blowing can be internal (to other people within that organization) or external (law enforcer’s agencies, media, or regulators).

This issue is controversial because many people argue it is not morally upright while other argues that it is the best thing to do. This paper covers all the ethical dynamics involved in whistle blowing because whistle blowing on a wrong practice or malpractice in a workplace is extremely delicate. The revelation of such information may ruin the reputation or destroy the organization.

Some people claim that, the act of whistle blowing is not morally upright or justified because any employee has the absolute obligation to loyalty and confidentiality to the company or the organization he or she works (Callahan 320).

On the other hand, whistle blowing is justified because it is a way of people to exercise their freedom of expression (Arszulowicz and Gasparski 69). The issue that arises with freedom of expression is whether every speech is right. This explains why many people feel that whistle blowers, who exercise their freedom of speech through this manner, do not give perfect speech. De George (31) asked five questions about whistleblowers as follows:

Does it cause serious harm to the entire public and the stakeholders?
Has the whistle blower informed the manager first?
Has the whistle blower put any effort to solve the issue using all available the inside channel?
Does the whistle blower possess any persuasive documents as evidence?
Is the whistle blower convinced that whistle blowing will work things out?

Further, he added that even with answers to the five questions it does not mean whistle blowing is morally upright.

Every profession entails code of ethics. In this case, ethics refers to the moral guidelines to guide the employees and employers. It entails all the dos and don’ts. The ethical behavior in any organization entails diligence, honesty, trust, fairness’s, consistency, respect, probity, integrity, and fairness.

Ethical behavior in the organization involves avoiding any form of conflict of interest and avoiding misuse of individual’s position (Callahan 331). However, many organization views whistle blowing as an act of disloyalty for the organization. In most cases, whistle blowing is more justified when done by the employer especially when an employee is directly responsibility.

The opposite is not justified in most organization. All professionals have a direct responsibility to blow the whistle but only under some circumstances. There is a prohibition to the professional employees from doing so under some other circumstances because whistle blowing represents a corrective mechanism in the workplace (Shaw and Barry 358).

The whistle blower takes the risk in an environment that is intimidating and fearful to reveal the truth of the matter from incompetent actions and conspiracy. This happens when the public safety and warfare is involved. Whistle blowing is termed as a courageous act and a wise decision. What makes the difference is the reception given to the information from the whistle blower by the audiences.

Most cases of whistle blowing are “internal whereby an employer reports the misconducts of her superior or fellow employee within the company” (Arszulowicz and Gasparski 65). The question many people ask is, why and when an employee should act as the company’s spot to stop any illegal actions.

Morally upright people automatically take action against any unethical action in the company. On the other hand, “external whistle blowers report the misconducts done by an outside or entity to the media, lawyer, watchdog agencies, or law enforcement agencies” (Arszulowicz and Gasparski 65).

In most cases, the external whistle blowers are motivated to do that by some monitory rewards. According to the United States federal statutes for whistleblowers, a justified whistleblower must have a compelling reason that the accused organization or person has violated a law.

He or she must testify through a court or legal proceeding. There are other situations whereby the whistleblower’ safety is paramount, and they are guaranteed some degree of protection.

Whistle blowing, can be viewed as disloyalty by the company. This aspect is because loyalty is the responsibility of every employee of any organization or company in all ways. This form of whistle blowing can be unethical, especially when the enemies and competitors of the company use the employees blowing the whistle for their own benefits (Madsen 277).

At the same time, the action is best for the public because it informs the public about the malpractices of the company. The challenge most whistleblowers face is fear. The public may not listen to them, and this situation may compromise their jobs.

The public disclose Act 1998, which came into effect in the year 1998, allows employees to talk the malpractices without any fear of losing their jobs. This act specifically gives protection to the employees willing to disclose information responsibly and reasonably for public interest hence facing victimization afterwards.

The act gives clear reasons as to why any organization should formulate policies for whistle blowing. This act creates an environment that facilitates dialogue and openness, hence encouraging the staff members to feel free to raise any issue without facing victimization.

According to the Act, every member of the organization, firm or company with any concern can raise it at any time, as long as it is a malpractice, unlawful act, or likely to cause danger to other staff members, the public and environment (Madsen 188).

Some of the issues listed in the Act includes; misuse of finances, trust’s information, assets, any unacceptable behavior, unsafe working conditions, and any other action that is contrary to the activities of the business or trust (Shaw and Barry 398).

The Act aims at avoiding the careless attitude from the employees, whereby an employee will notice something wrong going on in the organization, but they fail to blow the whistle because s/he feel it is not his or her responsibility or business.

The Act also enables employees to raise such issue without feeling they are disloyal to their employees, fellow workers or the organization. The formulation of the Act enables the employees raise matters in their organization early enough before finding enough proof or having things beyond control. The following are the main principles that guide the Act:

Incase the issue at hand relates to the conditions of the services or decision made by management affecting staff members at a personal level, as a group then the most appropriate way to deal with the issue is through grievances. The employees should air it under disputes procedures and grievance.
If the matter is associated with victimization, harassment or bullying of the staff the dignity of work procedures apply
If the Issues are associated with fraud, employees must air their views through the fraud contact director of procurement and finance.

In most cases after the whistleblower forwards the matter to the authority and especially in the internal whistle blowing, the management looks into the matter first to decide what action to take. The process may also involve an internal inquiry and further investigation (Shaw and Barry 400).

At this juncture, the whistle blower receives full information of what is happening, in terms of who is handling the matter and his or her contact, incase s/he needs to get in touch and communicate something further. The inquiry handling the matter may require the whistle blower to give suggestions of the solutions to the matter.

The purpose for this duty is to ensure the whistle blower does not have a self-interest concerning the issue. The whistleblower receives feedback, as much as possible, but also with absolute confidentiality, especially with reference to the nature of punishment given to the lawbreaker. The responsible team conducts investigations in secrecy to ensure avoid raising any suspicion.

According to Tavani (161), Enron Sherron and Cynthia Cooper received acknowledgment for their exemplary work in internal whistle blowing. According to the report, Cooper pushed through with an investigation that entailed an internal audit. Then she alerted the board of directors about the problems discovered.

This means that if she decided to keep silent after her discovery the issue would be unsorted. However, according to the reports, by the time the two people were blowing the whistle, great damage from the matter had affected the stakeholders and employees.

This means that, though they blew the whistle, it was already late. If the organization had in stall means of employees airing out issues they felt were against the good conduct, rules and regulations of the company matters would not have worsened.

This incidence is a point of reference, for explaining the need to encourage the employees, in an organization, to blow the whistle the moment they notice things are not working as stipulated.

Two questions frequently raised about the issue of whistle blowing include; “how should any organization create a favorable culture that will allow employees to raise any question that will point out unusual issues, showing courage in confronting unethical and illegal practices in the workplace” (Johnson 102).

How will the company ensure that appropriate action is taken to correct the issue early? The culture and norms, of an organization, are the determining factors of how much an employee is willing to give such risky information, especially where alienation and hostility may occur (Johnson 172).

Some employees may take the action as low and done for self-interest. The answers to the questions as given by different people include, formulation of whistle blowing policies in every organization, creating the right attitude towards whistle blowing and creating a culture that welcomes and encourages internal whistle blowing to avoid external whistle blowing which is more damaging to the organization.

The attitude of the management toward whistle blowing must be right to stop the unethical practical. Some employers will tell the employees that, by blowing the whistle on them, or other senior member of management, they are simply biting the hand that feeds them, or drilling holes in the same boat they are sailing. Some may even label the whistleblower as “informing”.

The organization management should regard these people as saviors because they are doing everything for the benefit of the organization. The consumer advocates for instance refers the whistle blowers as guardians (Johnson 171).

The whistleblowers are likely to face difficulties once they appeal externally to the public or internally hence the attitude towards them must be positive in any organization for the advantage of the organization, the stakeholders, shareholders, and employees.

Companies must take the initiative to train all leaders to encourage openness’s in the company from the employees. Through such training, some incidences like sexual harassment, bribing, and misuse of power do not prevail. This means that encouraging whistle blowing is the best way to avoid whistle blowing.

In addition, when employees know that whistle blowing is encouraged in the organization, none of them will indulge in harmful practices hence there will be no whistle blowing and especially externally. The achievement of this by a company entails putting in place practices that will encourage employees to forward any illegal or unethical practices to the concerned department.

By doing this, a company will ensure it prevents any damages that could occur through the mistakes committed by the employees. The company or organization’s employees will understand the seriousness of the organization in dealing with misconduct.

Many organizations have taken a step further to formulate policies that encourage whistle blowing through allowing the employees in the organization to report any illegal or unethical practices. Lack of proper policies in any organization encourages employees to conceal unethical issues they witness within the organization (Desjardins and McCall 163).

Even with such policies in place, barrier to whistle blowing may still exist. The following are the main barrier: fear of retaliation and alienation, especially from the peers, some belief that the management’s standard changed, misguided union’s solidarity, unwillingness of the employees to expose the unethical practice, and lack of trust with the internal system put in place to deal with the issues.

The organization must be keen to ensure the motives of the whistleblower are right and honorable. Incidences whereby an employee accuses the supervisor unjustly must be avoided (Shaw and Barry 370). The policy will also ensure some issues do not occur.

For example, a well skilled employee does not get away with illegal actions because they think they are above rules, laws, and regulations. The policy should get endorsement, from the top management, and then be given to employees to read through.

If need be, it can be published through the media for the public to read. This will ensure the public is in touch with the organization’s commitment. The policy should have means of investigation as well as follow-up. Whistle blowing policy in any organization is extremely significant because it speaks for the organization.

It shows the integrity of the organization is true, hence bringing value to the organization (Desjardins and McCall 163). The policy also shows that the organization values the opinions and efforts of the employees in trying to expose the wrong doings. It is a way of instilling discipline and a sense of responsibility to the employees.

Whistle blowing is only acceptable under the following conditions, when the person does the disclosure in good faith, when the information given by employees in the information is true. The whistleblower must act in such a way that he is reasonable and taking in account all the available circumstances to ensure there is not biasness (Shaw and Barry 399).

The person disclosing the matter must be truly sure that he or she is giving the information to the right person. The whistle blower must disclose the information to the legal advisors set apart by the organization, and if the team is not there, the whistleblower should only disclose the information to the authorities set apart by the government.

However, if the whistleblower believes that matter at hand is extremely serious and need attention urgently, should not follow the procedures laid down by the company but is allowed to blow the whistle straight.

The whistleblowers that are protected automatically by the law include, the workers from the company with issues blowing the whistle, the person who is sure the malpractice is truly happening, will occur in the future or happened in the past, and if they reveal the issue the right way and to the right person.

It is clear that whistle blowing is both beneficial and harmful. It is one of the ways to avoid misconducts in the company, firm, and organization. A company deals with some harmful and unethical malpractices, in the company through, this means, and thus every company must allow it.

Every worker in regard to any organization with whistle blowing policies has a social responsibility to the company and the public in ensuring he or she report such unethical practices (Callahan 333).

The following are the qualified disclosures for whistle blowing: criminal offense, failure to adhere to any legal obligation, environmental damage, threat to any person’s safety or health, justice miscarriages, and any deliberate action to cover these malpractices.

Works Cited

Arszulowicz, Marek, and Wojciech Gasparski. Whistleblowing: In Defense of Proper Action. London: Transaction Publishers, 2010. Print.

Callahan, Joan. Ethical Issues in Professional Life. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988. Print.

De George, Richard. Whistle Blowing In Business Ethics. New York: Macmillan Publishing, 1986. Print.

Desjardins, Joseph, and John McCall. Contemporary Issues in Business Ethics. California: Wadsworth Pub. Co., 1996. Print.

Johnson, Roberta. Whistleblowing: When It Works—And Why. San Francisco: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2003. Print.

Madsen, Peter. Essentials of Business Ethics. Canada: Meridian, 1990. Print.

Shaw, William, and Vincent Barry. Moral Issues in Business. California: Wadsworth, 1995. Print.

Tavani Herman. Ethics and Technology: Controversies, Questions, and Strategies for Ethical Computing. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 2010. Print.

Click Here To Order Now!

In Defense of Whistle Blowing

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We have qualified writers to help you.

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)