What is whistle blowing and does it breach company loyalty? There are many arguments to suggest whistle blowing does violate company loyalty and there are just as many arguments to suggest it does not violate loyalty to a company. Si sella Bok argues whistle blowing does violate loyalty to a company even though most of the time whistle blowing is justified. She says whistle blowing involves three elements: dissent (a difference of opinion), accusation and a violation of loyalty to one’s employer. Robert Larmer argues that an attempt to stop illegal or immoral company practices may be the highest kind of company loyalty an employee can display to his or her employer. In reading the December 30, 2003 – January 6, 2003 issue of Time Magazine, one can find arguments to support both Bok’s opinion and that of Professor Larmer’s. The article is of Agent Coleen Rowley who blew the whistle on her employer the FBI after the events of September 11, 2001 took place.
Bok’s argument states whistle blowing involves a difference of opinion. Agent Rowley’s opinion is the FBI has failed in the way it handles its investigations especially that of the events leading up to September 11, 2001. Director Mueller honestly did not want to believe there was anything wrong with the way the bureau handled its investigations. The second phase of whistle blowing involves accusation. Agent Rowley makes her accusations known in the memo she typed up for Director Mueller and the two members of the Senate Committee on Intelligence. She writes: “Dear Director Mueller:” (1) ” I feel at this point that I have to put my concerns in writing concerning the important topic of the FBI’s response to evidence of terrorist activity in the United States prior to September 11 th” (1).
The Essay on Does Blowing the Whistle Violate Company Loyalty?
Employees have moral obligations to respect the property of the corporation, to abide by employment” onmouseover=”window.status = ‘goto: employment’;return 1″ onmouseout=”window.status=””>employment contracts, and to operate within the bounds of the company’s procedural rules. However, the duty of loyalty is not absolute. That an employee ...
She goes on by saying the issues are of integrity and they go to the heart of the FBI’s law enforcement mission and mandate. The third phase is that of the violation of loyalty. Many might say, especially some of Agent Rowley’s co-workers and retired agents; that Agent Rowley did violate her loyalty of the organization she dreamed of as a child to become a part. There used to be a hanging of an essay on the walls of the FBI building during J. Edgar Hoover’s days of being the Director of the Bureau that read in part like this: “If you work for a man, in heavens name work for him; speak well of him and stand by the institution he represents. Remember an ounce of loyalty is worth a pound of cleverness…
If you must growl, condemn, and eternally find fault, why – resign your position and when you are on the outside, damn to your heart’s content” (1).
Fellow agents and retired agents truly believe Rowley was disloyal to the Bureau. A former president of the Society of former Special Agents compared Rowley to convicted spy Robert Hansen. He proclaimed her behavior was “unthinkable and instead of going to the Russians, she went to Congress” (1).
Professor Larmer says loyalty must first be defined.
There are many definitions of loyalty but he offers an adequate version for us in that loyalty involves acting in agreement with what one being the employee believes has a good reason to believe to be in the person’s (the employer) best interest. In the case of Agent Rowley, she believes she is acting in the best interest of her employer by writing the memo to Director Mueller and the two Senate committee members suggesting there were some bad decisions made in the way the FBI handled the events leading to 9/11. Agent Rowley never intended for her memo to go public before Director Muller and the two committee members had a chance to read it and respond. This brings us to Larmer’s second requirement of loyalty. He says that whenever possible we should confront the person we are being loyal to directly.
The Term Paper on Moral Agent Foetus Person Life
Is abortion ever justified If not, why If it depends, then on what It is not unreasonable to suggest that the vast majority of people consider it morally wrong to kill other persons. There may be examples of situations where the killing of a person may be justifiable, although they are by no means universally consented to, such as killing in self defence or as a form of capital punishment, but ...
This is exactly what Agent Rowley intended to do. She believed by confronting her superiors something would be done. There are times when confronting the person you are being loyal to is not possible especially if you know that by doing so they may try to find more clever ways to hide the misconduct. The third requirement of loyalty requires a person to be more concerned for the outcome other than justice being served. Agent Rowley demonstrates this requirement by not resigning her position and by continuing to send emails to her superiors making suggestions on how things can be better investigated even if they don’t get great deal of enthusiasm from her superiors. In conclusion, does blowing the whistle really violate company loyalty? It all depends on what is on the person’s agenda.
Does the person really want to see some good come out of the accusations or does the whistle blower have a hidden agenda to get ahead in the company or to make a profit from the accusations such as book deals or TV deals? If a person blows the whistle based on morality issues then it does not violate company loyalty. If the whistle blower has a hidden agenda, then it does violate loyalty as the person is only looking out for themselves and not for the company in which they work. I feel Agent Rowley demonstrated the utmost loyalty to her employer and the citizens of the United States by writing the memo even though it was not meant to have been seen by the public. She truly wants to see the FBI improve on the way it handles sensitive evidence or materials it receives; like the information they received prior to 9/11; so that another day like that does not happen again. If people like Agent Rowley stop blowing the whistle, there will be more days like September 11, 2001 to come.
There is no resolution to this tough ethical issue. All organizations have different views on what is acceptable behavior and practices. Blowing the whistle on your employer is a personal choice and we all have different morals and values. What might be immoral to me, may not be immoral for someone next to me. I do feel if the whistle blowing is to serve oneself only, that is a violation of loyalty to your employer. If blowing the whistle is going to keep others from suffering from the consequences of the misconduct, then you are not violating loyalty to your company.
The Term Paper on Company Profile of The Home Depot
ANALYSIS #11. COMPANY BACKGROUNDThe Home Depot Inc. was founded in 1978 and is the world's largest home improvement retailer and the second largest retailer in the United States. The sales for the fiscal year 2000 were $45.7 billion, compared to $38.4 billion in fiscal 1999. As of January 2001, the company was operating 1,134 retail stores in forty-seven states, six Canadian provinces, Puerto ...
It also depends on how severe the misconduct is. There again, we are looking at the different morals and values we all have in place. We are all different, but similar in some ways; and that is what makes us unique. This is why I feel there is no resolution to this issue. There is no right or wrong answer. It all depends on the individual or individuals.
(1) Ripley, Amanda, and Maggie Singer. “The Special Agent.” Time. 30 Dec 2002 – 06 Jan 2003: 34-40.
