It is estimated that somewhere between half and two-thirds of all whistleblowers lose their jobs. In general, the more systematic the wrongdoing within an organization, the greater the reprisal against those who expose it. (Dictionary definition of a whistleblower: a person who reports or discloses information of a threat or harm to the public interest in the context of their work-based relationship.) Often the whistleblower is not fired outright; she is usually demoralized and humiliated, which puts her under so much psychological stress that she often resigns or leaves the organization voluntarily. Whistleblowing is extremely risky business, not just within the United Nations but in any place where governments and corporations have something to hide. It can also cause deep anguish to the whistleblower. In his book called Whistleblowers: Broken Lives and Organizational Power, C. Fred Alford, a Professor of Government at the University of Maryland, College Park, provides a chilling and deeply pessimistic account of whistleblowers who have exposed corruption in high places. “I think we will not understand what is happening in our society until we listen to the tears, the screams, the pain, and horror of those …show more content…
Munyakei is credited with bringing to public attention what is known as the Goldenberg Scandal that cost the Kenyan economy about one billion dollars in the early 1990s. In April 1992, the whistleblower, who was then a junior clerk at the Central Bank of Kenya, started noticing stark irregularities in compensation claims for gold exports that he had been processing. Believing that the government might not know about the scam (Kenya is not a gold producer or exporter), through a friend, he alerted two opposition leaders about what he had discovered. When one of them tried to table Munyakei’s evidence in parliament, he was denied permission to do
Hughes Microelectronics is a company that were found to have unethical practices during the 1980’s when handling government contracts. This was brought to light by two whistleblowers that worked for the company at the time. The purpose of this is to review four main questions concerning the situation and how it was handled ethically by the whistleblower. The first and second parts will be fairly similar what were the responsibilities of the company itself, what were the responsibilities of the main whistleblower Margaret Goodearl. Next, the conflict between the two parties will be examined and also whether or not the situation was handled ethically. Lastly the question of whether or not whistleblowing is the most ethical solution
“I realized it for the first time in my life: there is nothing but mystery in the world, how it hides behind the fabric of our poor, browbeat days, shining brightly and we don't even know it.”
First I will be telling you about the pressure of being a “whistleblower”. In Fahrenheit 451 the pressure of being a “whistleblower” is so real, everyone is told to rat out everyone who has a book in their household, if they find out they have a book in the home it is burned to the ground. This is related to our society because we are pressured to do what is right, and part of my belief system is to do what is right and to point out what is wrong. For example if someone were to gossip behind their back I would try to stand up and tell them it is wrong and tell the person what the others said
“How do we come to grips with the fact that this thing has gotten way too real, out of control like some huge snowball running down a hill, threatening to smash and kill all in it’s path, including those who originally fashioned it? Time is of the essence, and every thinking person with a stake in life-especially those involved in the fighting-should put forth an effort, something more concrete than a “media truce,” to deal with this tragedy. The children deserve to have a descent childhood where they live. They shouldn’t have to be uprooted to the suburbs to experience peace. We cannot contaminate them with our feuds of madness, which are predicated on factors over which we have no control.”
For this essay, I will evaluate the Employee Loyalty Argument derived from ‘Whistleblowing and Employee Loyalty’ by Ronald Duska. I will argue that this Employee Loyalty Argument is deductively valid but is not deductively sound because premise 2 is false. I will justify my claims that premise 2 is false by arguing about how it is rational for employees to expect their companies to recognize and fulfill a duty of loyalty to their employees if the employees also have a duty of loyalty to the companies that employ them.
Whistle blowing is a controversial topic in the professional industry. Whistle blowing is the act of speaking out against a fellow colleague or even a friend that has done something non-ethical or illegal in the workplace. A whistleblower raises concerns about the wrongdoing inside of the workplace. Employees hesitate to become a whistleblower because of the idea of becoming a snitch on fellow employees and having a bad rep around the office. This concern was lowered in 1989 with a law called the Whistleblower Protection Act that protects federal government employees in the United States from retaliatory action for voluntarily disclosing information about dishonest or illegal activities occurring at a government organization (whistleblowers.gov).
“The ultimate tragedy is not the oppression and cruelty by the bad people but the silence over that by the good people.”~ Martin Luther King, Jr.
The term Whistleblower means “An employee who discloses information that s/he reasonably believes is evidence of illegality, gross waste or fraud, mismanagement, abuse of power, general wrongdoing, or a substantial and specific danger to public health and safety. When information is classified or otherwise restricted by Congress or Executive Order, disclosures only are protected as whistleblowing if made through designated, secure channels. (What is a Whistleblower?)” The idea behind whistleblowers is that they believe trying to inform the public of illegal acts within their businesses has the potential to protect the public from wrongdoing. The following studies analyze scholar’s findings on different factors related to whistle blowing as
Edward Snowden, the former National Security Agency (N.S.A) subcontractor turned whistle-blower is nothing short of a hero. His controversial decision to release information detailing the highly illegal ‘data mining’ practices of the N.S.A have caused shockwaves throughout the world and have raised important questions concerning how much the government actually monitors its people without their consent or knowledge. Comparable to Mark Felt in the Watergate scandals, Daniel Ellsberg with the Pentagon Papers, Edward Snowden joins the rank of infamous whistleblowers who gave up their jobs, livelihood, and forever will live under scrutiny of the public all in the service to the American people. Edward Snowden released information detailing the extent of the N.S.A breaches of American privacy and in doing so, became ostracized by the media and barred from freely reentering America, his home country.
The three things required for whistle blowing to take place are- wrong-doer (who commits the wrong-doing), whistle-blower (who observes and reports the wrong-doing) and recipient (who receives the report of wrong-doing) (Near & Miceli, 1996). Often whistle-blowers face retaliation for their actions which, according to a research by Near & Miceli (1996), correlates to ‘situational characteristics’ and occurs more often when the whistle-blower uses external rather than internal sources of reporting. There is a large literature dedicated wholly to Nancy Olivieri. The several hundred pages of reports were written-“Naimark Report” commissioned by the HSC, “Thompson report” commissioned by CAUT and “Report of inquiry committee” of CPSO (Schafer, 2004).
Corruption is a persistent problem that plagues the world and it knows no boundaries. Transparency International defines it as the “abuse of entrusted power for private gain” (2013). For the purposes of this thread, ‘corruption’ is defined as any individual, collective, or structural act or process that permits the use of public authority or position for private gain. This definition captures the broad and many ways individuals and institutions abuse power and the public trust. In regard to whistleblowing, much conflict stems from the context in which the whistleblower is viewed.
With the emergence of unethical practices found in international corporations, whistleblowing has been more and more common. A whistleblower is a person who exposes any kind of information that is deemed illegal, immoral, or dishonest. In SNC-Lavalin, the whistleblower was justified. In this case, the senior executives were paying bribes and taking money from mega projects won under the Gadhafi regime (Wikipedia, 2015, n.p). There are several issues in this case.
On November 29th, Mary Inman gave us a talk on the topic whistleblowing, which let me know more about the whistleblower activities and the whistleblower protection. According to the definition given by the website whistleblowers international, whistleblowing is someone who reveal the unethical or illegal activities within the company. The person can be current or past employee, or an outside individual who is familiar with the unethical activity. This whistleblower does not need to be U.S. citizen.
"I am young, I am twenty years old; yet I know nothing of life but despair, death, fear, and fatuous superficiality cast over an abyss of sorrow. I see how people are set against one another, and in silence, unknowingly, foolishly, obediently, innocently slay one another. I see that the keenest brains of the world invent weapons and words to make it yet more refined and enduring. And all men of my age, here and over there, throughout the whole world see these things. All my generation is experiencing these things with me..."
Whistle blowing is an attempt of an employee or former employee of a company to reveal what he or she believes to be a wrongdoing in or by a company or organization. Whistle blowing tries to make others aware of practices that are considered illegal or immoral. If the wrongdoing is reported to someone in the company it is said to be internal. Internal whistle blowing tends to do less damage to the company. There is also external whistle blowing. This is where the wrongdoing is reported to the media and brought to the attention of the public. This type of whistle blowing tends to affect the company in a negative way because of bad publicity. It is said that whistle blowing is personal if the wrongdoing affects the whistle blower alone (like sexual harassment), and said to be impersonal if the wrongdoing affects other people. Many people whistle blow for two main reasons: morality and revenge.