Whistle-blowing is considered an act of disloyalty to the organization, colleagues

and superiors. Do you agree with this statement? Explain with appropriate
examples.

The philosophy of whistle blowing is a very delicate issue. I totally disagree with the
statement that whistle-blowing is considered an act of disloyalty to the organization,
colleagues and superiors. I strongly believe this from the perspective of moral action,
one of conscience and which has nothing to do with self interest. I say so because if we
were to argue the issue of disloyalty from the stance of self interest, then it will be not
worthwhile discussing it in this essay.

Whistle blowing refers to the act of organisation members, either former or current,
disclosing information on illegal and unethical practices within the organisation to parties
internal or external to the organisation, who can take action. In a way, it can be argued
that whistle blowing is an important and valid method of endeavoring to control possible
unethical behaviour by organisations, as well as helping to establish a level of social
responsibility. For these reasons, it is important for society to disregard the negative tag
on whistle blowers and support them, so that their often valuable contribution towards
eliminating corporate wrongdoings can continue.

Why? Simply because ethics are codes of values and principles that govern the action
of a person, or a group of people regarding what is right versus what is wrong.
Therefore, ethics set standards as to what is good or bad in organizational conduct and
decision making. It deals with internal values that are a part of corporate culture and
shapes decisions concerning social responsibility with respect to the external
environment. Let me point out that morality of whistle blowing can be viewed from the
perspective that corporations have a moral obligation not to harm.

An ethical person is one who possesses strong character traits built on courage and
informed by the belief that integrity is the backbone of ethical decision-making. A would-
be-whistle-blower is willing to stand her ground even in the face of pressure from
higher-ups to stay silent. It’s not because of the possibility of receiving a whistle-
blower’s award. Instead, the whistle-blower believes in principled behavior and leads
her life in accordance with ethical values.

As I stated earlier, whistle blowing is the topic of dissatisfaction at the workplace that
has a great impact on the benefit of the society as a whole. Whistle blowing has a
significant impact on employee and organization. At the employee level, whistle blowing
entails the moral dilemmas and conflicts of interests faced by employees, whereas at
the organizational level, whistle blowing focuses on such issues as corporate
organizational culture and loyalty.

So this act of whistle blowing can cause a conflict of interest between the personal,
organizational and societal spheres. Again let me stress that much of this conflict stems
from the context in which a whistleblower is viewed: whether he is someone sharing
knowledge of misconduct for the benefit of others or as someone who is acting
“disloyal” to their organization, as mentioned above.

Now, let’s take a brief look at the employee’s dilemma. As we know, employees’
responsibilities towards their employers are provided in the employment contracts
according to laws in force as well as internal codes of conduct of various corporations.
Moreover, beyond the legal frame, we agree that there are certain moral duties of
employees towards the companies they work for. One of these duties is loyalty to the
organization. Many organizations wish for loyalty from their employees. Loyalty is a
feeling of trust and complete devotion to the organization. Keeping trade secrets,
devotion to corporate priorities, abstaining from any acts that could harm the company,
etc. are considered fundamental responsibilities of employees, who are themselves
stakeholders of the company.

The issue that we are debating here is: How far should this corporate loyalty go? What
happens when behavior required at the workplace comes is contradiction with moral
guidelines widely accepted in society or with the individual’s ethical standards? Social
responsibility is the concept that an organisation is part of the larger society in which it
exists and must therefore act in a way that not only advances the organisation, but also
serves the society. For instance, what does an employee have to do if asked by the
superior to falsify a company report or manufacture illegal products, threatening with
dismissal in case he/she refuses? Is it morally permissible for an employee to denounce
an illegality or does this represent an unacceptable breach of corporate loyalty?

Ethics and morality go hand in hand. If an employee faces an ethical crisis in the
workplace, he should consider first whether real harm may be done to others if he
doesn’t do everything in his power to correct the situation. Then, he should commit to
acting ethically; considering the consequences of his actions on others including
himself. Remember, our moral obligation to society does obligate us to right a wrong
when we see one that has occurred.

As I stated earlier, whistle blowing involves speaking out against wrongdoing (ethical or
legal). The whistleblower draws attention upon an illegal or dishonest act that takes
place in an organization, of which he/she is usually a member. The denounced
infringements may be of various types such as violation of the law/code of conduct,
direct threat to public interest, fraud, violation of health/security policies or corruption.
But being a moral agent, this act of whistle blowing should also be done in the rightful
manner. It should be handled by going through the standard organizational channel. If
that is not effective or somebody has good reason to believe that it will make the matter
worse, then one has to consider going outside the standard channels.

Now, this is why whistle blowing is not considered an act of disloyalty because it always
involves an actual or at least declared intention to prevent something bad that would
otherwise occur. It always involves information that would not ordinarily be revealed.
Most ethicists agree whistle blowing is an ethical action. According to the “standard
theory” on whistle blowing, whistle blowing is morally required when it is required at all;
people have a moral obligation to prevent serious harm to others if they can do so with
little costs to themselves.
It is interesting to note that most whistleblowers are among the best employees in the
organization (David, 2005, cited in Benson & Ross, 1998). Whistleblowers often
describe themselves as members who initiated whistle blowing because of their loyalty
to the organization. Whistleblowers are perceived as having the organization’s long term
interests at heart. Loyal, long-term members of organizations may be more likely to
blow the whistle than to remain silent. Many whistleblowers have been on the job for
years, are highly respected and are considered by their managers to be successful and
loyal employees (David, 2005, cited in Glazer et. al., 1994).

Whistleblowers can be considered as the unsung heroes who are making a difference in
our lives every day. We should to be thankful for the courage of unsung heroes who
have sacrificed much to protect society. We owe a great debt of gratitude to
whistleblowers that have saved us from environmental hazards such as toxins that are
carelessly dumped into lakes and streams. You know, it takes an act of courage for
people to stand up like this. Whistleblowers become heroes of conscious because they
believe in honesty as the most basic moral precept.

For me, the misconception of disloyalty diminishes when we look at the fact that whistle
blowing brings a lot of benefits. It certainly benefits the organization because they
address the problem of dangerous practices or corruption, which ultimately increase
productivity of organization. Therefore, in the long run it can reduce the losses and cost
which organization have to bear as consequences of wrongdoing. The beneficial effects
of whistle blowing are especially apparent in high-stakes of public health and safety
because of the substantial potential dangers posed. Nuclear power plants,
pharmaceutical firms and automobile manufacturer are places where decisions can
have consequences that would preserve life or its quality. For these organizations which
operate daily with the threat of a misfortune, in event of mistakes, whistle blowing could
be a kind of early alarm system.

To further prove my point, I think whistle blowing is justifiable in five conditions, each
one of them occurred when the public and corporation interests are positively related
and the consequences of blowing the whistle will ultimately benefit the corporation.
Whistle blowing must be acknowledged and rewarded by the general public. Sometimes
the action of whistle blowing brings danger to whistleblowers, so the federal and local
governments have to protect them by enacting laws and regulations.

The first condition is when the firm, through a product or policy, will commit serious and
considerable harm to the public, the employee should report the firm. Let me give an
example: Dr David Franklin, a microbiologist and former fellow of Harvard Medical
School In 1996 blow the whistle on Pfizer Inc. for medical fraud. Pfizer was accused of
testing new drugs on children during a meningitis epidemic in Nigeria without ethical
approval. Pfizer Inc. settled in 2004 and paid $430 million in fines. Franklin, under the
whistle blowers act received $26.6 million. (http://www.corporatenarc.com/franklin.php)

The second condition is when the employee identifies a serious threat of harm, he or
she should report it and state his or her moral concern. Dr. Jeffrey S. Wigand is a
former vice president of research and development at Brown & Williamson in Louisville,
Kentucky, who worked on the development of reduced-harm cigarettes. Company's
decisions involving the selection of ingredients in their cigarettes when on February 4,
1996 on the CBS news program 60 Minutes, he stated Brown & Williamson intentionally
manipulates the tobacco blend to increase the amount of nicotine in cigarette smoke,
thereby increasing the 'impact' to the smoker. (http://www.jeffreywigand.com/)
Dr. Wigand has received Ethical Humanist of the Year and Smoke-Free America Award
in 1996. After that he has received numerous honors and awards for his dedicated
work. (Complete award list:http://www.jeffreywigand.com/honors.php)

The third is when the employee’s immediate supervisor does not act, the employee
should exhaust the internal procedures and chain of command to the board of directors.
Mark Klein is a former AT&T technician who leaked knowledge of his company's
cooperation with the United States National Security Agency in installing network
hardware to monitor and process American telecommunications. In recognition of his
actions, the Electronic Frontier foundation picked Klein as one of the winners of its 2008
Awards. (http://www.salon.com)

The fourth, the employee must have documented evidence that is convincing to a
reasonable, impartial observer that his or her view of the situation is accurate and
evidence that the firm’s practice, product, or policy seriously threatens and puts in
danger the public or product user. Douglas D. Keeth, a former corporate vice president
for finance at United Technologies, which is based in Hartford, had participated in an
internal investigation of the wrongdoing when the company first learned that its Sikorsky
Aircraft division was billing the Pentagon for work it had not yet performed. But when he
reported these findings to corporate headquarters in March 1989, the unnamed
managers first ordered that all copies of the report, including hundreds of pages of
internal company memos, voice-mail messages, and records be destroyed. (New York
Times,http://www.nytimes.com)

And finally, the employee must have valid reasons to believe that revealing the
wrongdoing to the public will result in the changes necessary to remedy the situation.
The chances of succeeding must be equal to the risk and danger the employee takes to
blow the whistle. Robert MacLean, who disclosed that the FAMS planned to remove air
marshals from nonstop, long distance flights—the same type of aircraft used during the
September 11 attacks in 2001, in order to avoid the cost of overnight hotel stay.
(http://www.whistleblowers.org)

It can be concluded that blowing the whistle where and then it is morally needful for the
protection of a larger interest than that of the employer, does not mean lack of loyalty to
the company. Being loyal to one’s employer is not incompatible with blowing the whistle
about their wrongdoing, because employee loyalty and whistle-blowing serve the same
goal, the moral good of the employer.
REFERENCES

Whistleblowers — heroes or traitors?: Individual and collective ...

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1367578802000251

Benson and Ross, 1998. J.A. Benson, D.L. Ross, Sundstrand. J., Journal of Business Ethics,
17.

Whistleblowers: Loyal Corporate Employee or Disloyal ... -

Cornerstonecornerstone.lib.mnsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1017&context=ctamj

Is Whistleblowing a Moral Act? - Ethics Sage

https://www.ethicssage.com/2015/07/is-whistleblowing-a-moral-act.html

Ethics: Whistle Blowing or Disloyalty? | icma.org

https://icma.org/documents/ethics-whistle-blowing-or-disloyalty

Ethics and whistleblowing – Expolink

https://www.expolink.co.uk/blog/ethics-and-whistleblowing/

A Business Ethics Theory of Whistleblowing: Responding to the ...

https://www.researchgate.net/.../267026051_A_Business_Ethics_Theory_of_Whistlebl...

A justification of whistleblowing - ResearchGate

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/317387594_A_justification_of_whistleblowing

Business Ethics, Richard T. De George ,Prentice Hall.

De George Whistleblowing Decision Criteria

www.richardcheeks.com/professor/DeGeorge-x.htm