Group 6

Bao Lam, Mike Leonardi, Femi Ashaolu, Nick Towery, Trevor Diresta

Speaking Out About Malt- Case 8.3

Moral Argument
I cannot will a maxim where an employee is protected from termination if that employee
knowingly, actively and publically speaks out against the interest of his or her employer. Mary
actively pursued the publication of material that would damage the image of her employer by
allowing a newspaper to make her facts more sensationalistic. Furthermore, Mary intended on
speaking out against the industry that her employer pursues, therefore, Mary acted immorally.
Support:

Mary Davis, Associate Vice President of Whitewater Brewing Co. had a conflict of
interest relating to her loyalty to the company called into question after writing an article
in regards to the dangers of low priced, high potency alcohol.

40oz. are a cheap way to get drunk, especially for many inner-city teenagers.

Working for the company mean she obtains a lot of information about the product and
the act of using that information in her paper without the permission of the company is
immoral, even if the is true and the product may be unhealthy or damaging to the
community.

Discussion Questions

Did Mary act disloyal or irresponsibly?

What restrictions, if any at all, should a company be able to place on an employees

right to speak out?

If you were Mary, how would you handle the ultimatum given by the
Company?

Would the company have been in the right to have fired Mary?