6.Whistle Blowing

8/11/2019 6.Whistle Blowing

1/30

Whistle blowing in its most general form

involves calling (public) attention to wrong

doing, typically in order to avert harm.

Whistle blowing is an attempt by a member or

former member of an organization to

disclose wrong doing in or by the

organization.


2/30

Kinds of Whistle blowing:

Internal Whistle blowing is made tosomeone within the organization.

Personal Whistle blowing is blowing the

whistle on the offender, here the charge isnot against the organization or system butagainst one individual.

The impersonal, External Whistle Blowing.


3/30

A situation in which a member disclosesquestionable practices to persons or organizationswho may be able to act on them. Traditionallyviewed as involving dissent, breach of loyalty, andaccusation of wrongdoing.

7 Stages of Whistleblowing Discovery of abuse

Reflection on what action to take

Confrontation with superiors

Response of complaint recipient & organization(often one of retaliation)

Whistleblowers response (often legal action)

Termination of the case

Going on to a new life


4/30

According to Richard T De George thereare three conditions that must hold for

whistle-blowing to be morallypermissible, and two additionalconditions that must hold for it to bemorally obligatory. The three conditions

that must hold for it to be morallypermissible are:


5/30

The firm through its product or policy will doserious and considerable harm to the public,whether in the person of the user of itsproduct, an innocent bystander, or the

general public.

Once an employee identifies a serious threatto the user of a product or to the generalpublic, he or she should report it to his or

her immediate superior and make his or hermoral concern known. Unless he or she doesso, the act of Whistle blowing is notjustifiable.


6/30

If one's immediate superior does nothingeffective about the concern or complaint,the employee should exhaust the internalprocedures and possibilities within thefirm. This usually will involve taking thematter up the managerial ladder, and ifnecessary and possible to the board ofdirectors.


7/30

The two additional conditions for Whistleblowing to be morally obligatory:

Whistleblower must have accessibledocumented evidence that wouldconvince a reasonable, impartial observerthat one's view of the situation is correct,

and that the company's product orpractice posses a serious and likelydanger to the public or to the user of theproduct.


8/30

The employee must have good reason to

believe that by going public the necessarychanges will be brought about. The chance of

being successful must be worth the risk one

takes and danger to which one is exposed.


9/30

George further believes that situationwhich involve serious body harm or deathare so different from non-physical harm,

such as financial harm as a result offraud. He says non physical harm is not asserious an injury as suffering physicalharm.


10/30

IDEALISTICHonestyEfficiency, CorrectnessSupport for Victim (of fraud)

DEFENSIVE.Against being associated with an illegal act

NEGATIVE.Dislike of supervisor

ParanoiaLoud MouthTo avoid censure

AND POSSIBLY SEVERAL REASONS MIXED TOGETHER


11/30

The whistleblower, in other words, should have

supporting reasons for claiming that the procedures

or activities of the agency or company are wrong,

or that it is pursuing the wrong objectives, other

than that the whistleblower believes that they are

wrong.

ACTIVITIES THAT THE WHISTLEBLOWER BELIEVES

ARE INCOMPETENTLY MANAGED, or

THAT THE ORGANISATION SHOULD BE PURSUING,

Unless a breach of clearly agreed objectives or documentedprocedures are evident.

IT IS NOT


12/30

WHISTLEBLOWING GENERATES CONSIDERABLE

HOSTILITY from the people targetted by thewhistleblower and by the organisation generally.

REASONS FOR HOSTILITY:

A BELIEF THAT THE WHISTLEBLOWER IS DISLOYAL,is

Acting against basic instincts of solidarity andmutual protection (tribal instincts), Destroying security (jobs & income) of colleagues, Stealing information (unfortunately necessary to

prove accusations)


13/30

Dissent- Must speak out against othersin organization

Breach of Loyalty- Perceived as onewho violates confidentiality and loyalty

Accusation - Singles out specific

individuals as threats to organizationor the public


14/30

Fired

Blacklisted

Transferred to undesirable locations

Lifestyles AND mental stability

questioned

Physical abuse and murder possible


15/30

Severe problems for society or

organization

Can be implicated as an accessory

before or after the fact


16/30

In charge of Quality Control

Company makes parts for automobile brakes

Find defect in brake part

Could cause failure in brakes Failure not certain

May take many years to developGo to VP of Production, your boss

He tells you to overlook defect - company mayloose too much money

What would you do?


17/30

1. Make sure situation involves an

imminent threat to society or to the

business2. Document all allegations

3. Examine internal whistleblowing first

4. Should you remain anonymous?5. Get another job first!!!


18/30

CorporateEmployer Loyalty

ObedienceConfidentiality

Employee

Traditional

(Has certain rights)

PublicEmployeeCorporateEmployer

Whistle blowing

Responsibility Responsibility

(Has certain

rights)(Has certain

rights)

Emerging


19/30

Whistle-blowing has been praised by many

as courageous actions taken by a few

good people with a moral conscience whorisk everything to call public attention to

illegitimate business practices and illegal

and immoral actions


20/30

Whistle-blowing is morallyproblematic because employees areseen to have a prima facie duty ofloyalty to their employers

Prima facie (first face) at first sight accepted as correct until proven

otherwise Why does it make sense to say that

employees owe loyalty to theiremployers?


21/30


22/30

Paradox of Burden Whistle-blowersgenerally act at considerable risk tothemselves

Paradox of Missing Harm Merelyseeking to prevent falsification of therecord does not constitute a case ofserious and considerable harm

Paradox of Failure Whistle-blowersare rarely successful at preventingserious and considerable harm


23/30

Whistle-blowing is permissible when: The organization that the whistle-blower belongs to

will, through product or policy, do serious andconsiderable harm

The whistleblower has reported the threat of harm

to her superiors and it is obvious that her superiorswill do nothing effective

The whistle-blower has exhausted all additionalinternal procedures

The whistle-blower has evidence that wouldconvince a reasonable, impartial observer thatshes correct

The whistle-blower has good reason to believethat blowing the whistle will prevent the harm at

a reasonable cost


24/30

What you reveal derives from your work at the

organization

You are a voluntary member of that organization

You believe that the organization is engaged inserious moral wrongdoing

You believe that your work will contribute to the

wrongdoing if you do not reveal it publicly

You are justified in your beliefs regardingPREVIOUS TWO POINTS

The two points referred to in previous point are

true


25/30

Ronald Duska

Whistleblowing and EmployeeLoyalty Whistle-blowing requires a moral

justification. Concludes that companies are not

something that can legitimately demandloyalty.

If employees do not owe loyalty to theiremployers then there is no need to morallyjustify whistle-blowing.

I.e., whistle-blowing is permissible Especially when a company is harming society.


26/30

Loyalty is a wholehearted devotion to

another person

Loyalty entails self-sacrifice without the

expectation of reward

We can have loyalty to groups that are

bound by mutual fulfillment and support

But, companies are not such groups because they are solely bound by division of

labor and the generation of profit


27/30

Whistle-blowing is often seen as disloyal

because it is analogous to calling a foul on your ownteam

Duska says this is a bad analogy

Business has no end with clear winners or losers suchas in a game

The game of business affects all stakeholders, notjust the players who actually work in the firm.

Thus, there is no duty of loyalty owed to an employer

Since employees do not owe a duty of loyalty to theiremployers there is no need for a moral justificationfor whistle-blowing


28/30

An employee is an agent of his or her employer. Anagent is a person engaged to act in the interest ofanother person, who is known as the principal.

Employees are legally agents of their employers.As agents, they are obligated to work as directed,to protect confidential information, and, ingeneral, to act in the principals best interest.Although the whistle-blower might appear to be a

disloyal agent, the obligations of an agents loyaltyhas limits. Whistle-blowing, therefore, is notincompatible with being a loyal agent. Two limitson the obligation of agents are especiallyimportant.


29/30

An agent has an obligation to obey only

reasonable directives of the principal,

and so an agent cannot be required to do

anything illegal or immoral. The obligations of an agent are confined

to the needs of the relationship. Thus,

an employee is not obligated to do

anything that falls outside the scope ofhis or her employment.


30/30

If loyalty is viewed as a commitment to the true

interests or goals of an organization, rather thanmerely the following of orders, then many whistle-blowers are loyal employees.

Sociological studies have shown that whistle-blowersare often loyal employees who choose to exposewrongdoing in the belief that they are doing theirjob and acting in the best interest of the company.

In the book Exit, Voice, and Loyalty, Albert O.Hirschman holds that speaking out (voice) andleaving (exit) are the main options for dissatisfiedorganization members and that those who exercisethe voice option are generally more loyal than thosewho decide to exit

Date post:	02-Jun-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	muneer-hussain
View:	226 times
Download:	1 times

6.Whistle Blowing

Documents