Whistleblowing and the Consequences

Whistleblowing is an act that has become much prevalent in the bodied and individual(a) sectors. A whistleblower is described by Liuzzo (2013) as a mortal who reveals to a governmental authority, or to news media, confidential information concerning few wrongdoing or conduct that he or she regards as wrong (p. 28). Some of the most notable characters in coupled States level induct involved corporations, utility companies and the President. Some cases squander been so extensive that they turn out brought intimately the collapse of corporate giants and even garnered the re mutual oppositionation of the President previous to his impeachment.The following leave behind outline slightly notable cases, reasons why some mass answer to blow the whistle and steps that the Occupational prophylactic & health Administration (OSHA) has taken to secure the rights of those who report violations in the work rest home. With great frequency, inside organization constituents such a s employees and board members argon insurance coverage issues of wrongdoing by their companies, instead of the reports coming from external auditing agencies (Mesmer-Magnus & Viswesvaran, 2005, p. 277).Whistleblowing is further define as, the disclosure by organization members ( designer or current) of outlaw(prenominal), immoral, or illegitimate practices down the stairs the control of their employers, to soulfulnesss or organizations that may be able to effect transaction (as cited in Mesmer-Magnus & Viswesvaran, 2005). Companies try to anticipate the possibility of unfaithfulness by demanding employees sign an employment contract or non-disclosure agreement, which would render the disclosure of compevery telephone circuit a serious offense. Employees who bump an unjust action is taking post within their organization have two channels to approach to phone the issues.An internal channel consists of reporting the offense to club management so that they have the opportunit y to research and contend with the offense(s). This is the most beneficial to any organization as it allows them to determine solutions and their internal issues stay safeguarded. Instead of lengthened investigations and legal troubles, companies could spell thousands of dollars if the employee brings to light an issue internally to management, which provides the information to the batch who are best able to resolve the situation.Although internal channels are best for organizations, theymay not be the best option for the employee to regard compliance. External channels would include news media and government officials. People who decide to use the external route are considered whistleblowers. Organizations are least credibly to welcome this form of disclosure, as their profits volition in all probability plank while the bad press spreads. Some employees go this route without discussing the issues with corporate management because they do not know who to talk to or they feel that their concerns will not be addressed. People also go layabout their employers backwards because they are afraid of retaliation and being labelled a trader by co-workers.The use of the word whistleblowing actually goes back more than 100 familys and had nothing to do with corporate espionage or wrongdoing. The term came about in 1863 in the federal governments False Claims spell (Eaton & Akers, 2007). The Act was initially enacted to incent consumers to report acts of wrongdoing against the government. correspond to Eaton and Akers (2007), Congress revived the Act in 1986 and retaliation legislation was added. The whistle-blower Protection Act of 1989 strengthens the aegis for employees who disclose waste and player.In 2002, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) was added by and by the collapse of Enron to hold publicly held corporations accountable for their actions. Whistleblowing statutes may vary from say to state. There are some states that tho allow protection to a whist leblower if he or she is a public employee or is functional for a government contractor (Whistleblower, 2008). Some statutes allow for only the someone blowing the whistle to have protection against employer retaliation, while others allow co-workers that are livelihood the whistleblower in their effort protection.This is why it is vital to research the truth within the state the injustice occurred. Whistleblowing cases have been steadily increasing year over year since an additional 21 federal laws have been endue into place to coincide with the OSH Act 1970. Each law outlines what is considered a racist act and the deadlines around filing a complaint. Due to the protection that these laws provide, more and more people are coming forward and disclosing issues within their knowledge. OHSA protection means that companies cannot take adverse actions against employees for uncovering the truth (OccupationalSafety & Health Administration, 2012).These actions include, but are not li mited to firing, demoting, harassing threats, and reducing pay and/or overtime. Constant updates to whistleblowing laws are allowing more industries to outline the rights of those who are thinking about disclosing misdeeds. Violations that are being reported include issues with airline and workplace safety, consumer products, victuals industry safety, and securities fraud. As of March 31, 2012, OHSA has reported a 139% increase in yearly reported cases from 2005 through 2011 (Occupational Safety & Health Administration, 2012).During the same period, only 2% of the cases determined were given merit, 22% were settled and the remaining 77% were either discount or withdrawn. These statistics lend credibility to the determination of the people who are blowing the whistle and trying to make the world a safer place for all. Although the constant updates to the laws are beneficial, in come cases anonymity would be close for the whistleblower. The implementation of a whistleblowing cons titution within companies, organizations and schools is encouraged to avoid modify public attention and loss of internal morale.The Association of demonstrate invention Examiners compiles data every other year on fraud cases both(prenominal) in the United States and internationally. The 2012 Report to the Nations on Fraud and Abuse provides the following statistics for those organizations surveyed between January 2010 and December 2011 (1) 5% of annual revenues are lost to fraud each year, (2) The medium loss to fraud was $140,000, with one-fifth of the cases involving over $1 million, (3) Most frauds occurred for 18 months before detection, and (4) Most frauds were detected through employee tips (Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, 2012).A 5% loss to fraud each year is further from an insignificant amount to a company, and the statistic proves that providing employees with guidelines for revealing fraud can save a company thousands of dollars each year. The creation and inception of a whistleblowing policy is a small price to pay for safeguarding a company against losings to financial and human capital. Whistleblowing happens for a variety of reasons, including identifying decadency, public safety and securities fraud.Sometimes the whistleblower is a direct employee of the company brought under interrogatory, while others have inner(a) knowledge of wrongdoings through a working relationship. Although whistleblowing happens all around the world, the United States has had its share of famous cases that brought about new regulations to control further corruption in business dealings. Three cases and their outcomes are 1)In June 1972, a break-in at the Watergate Hotel in chapiter, D. C. led to the resignation of the then current President, Richard M. Nixon.One of the perpetrators was a former CIA operative and a current security advisor to the Presidents re-election campaign. Notebooks containing the phone number for E. Howard Hunt (W. H. ) were fo und on two of the men, and these clues gave source to intense media attention (Woodward, 2005). The United States Senate started an investigation to determine how far stint the scandal was. A confidential informant, afterwards dubbed Deep Throat, provided Washington reporters Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein insight into misdeeds by the President and his advisors.Deep Throat go along to tell Woodward & Bernstein to follow the specie until they eventually uncovered the unlawful indiscretions hap in the White House (Arnold, 2008). On May 31, 2005, Vanity elegant magazine released the announcement that former FBI Associate Director Mark matte was in fact Deep Throat. Felt was convicted of authorizing illegal FBI searches in 1980 and was later pardoned by President Ronald Reagan. 2)Dr. Jeffrey Wigand, a former vice president and head up of research and development for Brown and Williamson, disclosed deceptive practices by tobacco companies in the manipulation of nicotine.He co mmunicated that they knew nicotine was addictive, but failed to act upon it (Arnold, 2008). Jeffrey also insisted that the company treat research proving that flavoring added to cigarettes ca apply cancer, along with concealing damaging documents that could be used against them in cases brought by sick patients. Jeffrey considered the whistleblowing a great ad hominem run a risk to himself and his family but still decided that it was for the better good of people and bon ton for the practice to be exposed (Whistleblower Center, n. d.)Testifying as a master witness, he helped the formation of the 1998 Master Settlement Agreement that implemented a $246 cardinal settlement against large tobacco giants. Wigand was fired from his position prior to blowing the whistle, and he described his subsequent harassment in an interview on 60 Minutes in 1996. Becoming a whistleblower had damaging cause on Wigands carriage, some of which he has overcome after a great umpteen years. He no lon ger had any privacy, and his study was ruined. Death threats against him precluded that he needed around-the-clock bodyguards for several years.His wife disassociate him and took his two children to live with her in another state. A critically acclaimed pictorial matter titled The Insider was made about his story in 1999 and it highlighted the harassment that he endured. After the movie came out, Jeffrey was in demand to speak at schools and health organizations about the dangers of tobacco and smoking (Salter, 2002). Salter also states that Wigand became a instructor and eventually reconciled with his children. 3)One of the most famous whistleblowing cases in recent history involved the collapse of the energy giant, Enron.Executive Sherron Watkins disclosed extreme accounting system irregularities to Enron chief operating officer Kenneth disgrace and expressed her concern for the collapse of the company (Arnold, 2008). After Lay did nothing and Watkins was demoted, Enron share s fell to $1 in November 2001 from a mid-2000 high of $90. In their book The Smartest Guys in the Room, McLean and Elkind surmise, The Enron scandal grew out of a steady compendium of habits and values and actions that began years before and finally spiraled out of control (2004, pgs.132-133).Deceptive accounting practices hid billions of dollars of debt from failed transactions, and Enron pushed auditors Arthur Anderson to ignore and not report them either. Many of the firms executives were convicted and played out time in prison. The auditing firm of Arthur Anderson was indicted and found guilty in district Court, but the Supreme Court later overturned the conviction. By this time, Andersons reputation had been marred and most of their customers abandoned them. This led to the shutdown of the firm.The lies and deceptions by both Enron and Arthur Anderson helped to create the previously mentioned SOX legislation. Several studies have been done on whistleblowers over the years to determine the motivation behind their actions. While results take care to differ slightly across studies, whistleblowers (as compared with inactive observers) tend to have good job performance, to be more highly educated, to hold higher-level or supervisory positions, to score higher on tests of moral reasoning, and to value whistleblowing in the fount of unethical behavior (as cited in Mesmer-Magnus & Viswesvaran, 2005).This information indicates that someone with a stool of responsibility in an organization will have the knowledge of unethical, internal practices. A mortal of high moral nous is more likely to turn in a company for violating various laws and standards, than someone who is alright with cutting corners to keep him employed. Before becoming a whistleblower, a person must have absolute certainty that a protected Act is being violated. The OSHA website contains a list of the Acts and their descriptions to determine which one is being breached. It will also provide the type of communication for the complaint (i.e. telephone or writing. )Adherence to the guidelines is important to ensure that protection coverage is available in the case of retaliation by an employer. In addition, weighing the many pros and cons before make a decision to blow the whistle on a company or organization is vital. Whistleblowing should not be taken lightly, and the decision should be carefully thought out. Aggressive documentation of the issues and conversations with company management is extremely important. Researching which authority to approach is highly imperative.Although law protects whistleblowers, they sometimes will set about job loss, harassment, intimidation and even loss of property or life while pursuing the issue and resolution. Long, drawn-out court cases can trey to a loss of income and notoriety. Lengthy investigations can lead to secret personal issues becoming known. Lots of support from family and friends is needed during an investigation be cause the intense scrutiny can break down a persons will. A person needs to be certain that they are prepared for an blast from the government and media prior to proceeding with their disclosure.Conversely, whistleblowing will give a person a moral sense of pride. Standing up for what you believe in will show people that you are not afraid to adjure for what is right. Whistleblowers may also be looked upon as trustworthy since they are flavour out for the welfare of others. Sometimes it is possible to find out reward sums of money from the government for uncovering injustices. Lastly, if a whistleblower is unjustly retaliated against, they may obtain monetary remedies from their companies for retaliation.A recent tax fraud case against the Swiss brink USB AG awarded the whistleblower a record $104 million reward provided by the United State Internal Revenue Service (Temple-West & Browning, 2012). In a rare case like this, the whistleblower spent time in prison for his wrongdoin g, but then was handsomely rewarded for turning in his employer for promoting an illegal act. People have deeply personal reasons for blowing the whistle. Some may catch out it as a safety concern, while others who have participated in illegal acts have had a guilty conscience that they want to unburden.Hundreds of cases are reported, dismissed and/or won each year with the help of OSHA. Being a whistleblower is not something to be taken lightly as many questions must be raised before proceeding with the act. Numerous laws have made it easier for people to come forward when they witness misdeeds by those in charge, but knowing history and potential outcomes prior to voicing concerns will enable a person to deal with the backlash. Having good moral judgment and standing up for what you believe in will allow a person to live their life with few worries and a clear conscience.