Pros and cons of whistle-blowing

Pros and Cons of Whistleblowing
Student’s Name
Student ID
Professor’s Name
Course Title
Date of Submission
Introduction
Whistleblowing is a situation where an illegal or unethical conduct is reported. Some people are against whistleblowers while some of the recognize and appreciate them. Whistleblowing can be internal or external. Internal whistleblowing is whereby an employee says the misconduct to people within the organization. On the other hand, external whistleblowing is whereby an employee exposes the unethical behavior to the general public. Misconduct can vary widely and can, therefore, range from minor to complex deeds involving immoral behavior. It does not have to be a big issue. Employees are encouraged to report even the minor issues that they see in the office. In most cases, employees have been the ones that are whistleblowers. Therefore, these employees tend to expose dishonest, dangerous, fraudulent and illegal practices of their employers.
Whistleblowing can occur internally or externally. An employee can report internally top the managers or CEO or can report the matter to the police, the media or other government agencies. The Public Interest Disclosure Act of 1998 is a law that was established to ensure that employees who blow the whistle on multiple misconducts are protected. This Act, therefore, encourages people to stand up and expose misconduct in organizations. For the whistleblower to be protected, one must have information that proves beyond doubt that malpractice occurred.

Further such a disclosure must be done in good faith. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 another law that was passed to handle cases of unethical behavior and whistleblowing. This law was created after a series of scandals that faced such companies such as Enron and others (Bartlett, 2015). This law was designed to ensure that investors were protected from fraudulent activities by a company. Millions of companies must comply with the requirements of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.
Companies need to make sure that their accounting operations comply with the regulation of this law. This law also contains important protections for corporate whistleblowers. In spite of the various laws that have been established for the protection of whistleblowers, most of them fear to stand up and report illegal or unethical issues. Most of them fear to lose their jobs, discriminatory treatment and other malpractices against them. The purpose of this paper is to explain the pros and cons of whistleblowing concerning workplace ethics.
Pros of whistleblowing
There are various pros of whistleblowing. First, the whistleblower can benefit from financial compensations that are issued when someone exposes unethical behavior. When something fraudulent is happening somewhere, there is a very high possibility that someone is losing a lot financially. In recent days some laws were created to deal with those that stand up and report something wrong. These people can end up being compensated a certain amount of money. The compensation can be worth millions of dollars and therefore the financial life of a whistleblower can be impacted significantly. Financial compensation can benefit a company by encouraging other employees to stand up and report any wrongdoing that they encounter in the organization. This situation would, therefore, help in improving transparency, responsibility and honesty in society. Employees would, therefore, be scared to do things that are inappropriate since they are aware that once someone sees it, they can be in trouble for their actions (Bjørkelo, 2013).
Whistleblowing has the advantage of being an ethical decision. Whistleblowing the right way to do things and a whistleblower can have self-satisfaction after reporting activities that are unethical. A person can have a clear conscience after delivering the message to the right stakeholders. On the other hand, it is disturbing when an employee sees an employer or a fellow employee doing some that are not appropriate and continue to keep silent about it. Further, it is a wise decision to make especially if the unethical behavior is related to the person. Sometimes, employees have done things that are inappropriate while others are watching but fail to report it. Most of the time when this action is realized the employees who were watching even though they were not directly linked to the act, they can be affected in a negative way if the management realized what was going on (Davis, 2013).
The another advantage is that whistleblowers are protected from retaliation and revenge. Various programs have put in place to ensure that whistleblowers are protected from retaliation. Various civil laws have been established for the purpose of protecting whistleblowers. These laws, therefore, allow whistleblowers to file laws suits against people who try to revenge against them. Whistleblowers have the chance to live healthy lives even after exposing unethical behavior since employers are restricted from discriminating such employees. These employers cannot fire these individuals due to their actions. This step is a significant advantage to anyone who intends to become a whistleblower (Farag, 2016).
Whistleblowing allows employees to be honest and transparent. It also encourages clear communication in an organization. Employees would, therefore, show commitment to the company’s success and its mission. Whistleblowing can protect a company’s clients. Some employees have carried out, so unethical practices, therefore, affecting consumers in a negative manner. Such actions can endanger the survival of such a company since the clients would not come back to buy or to get services again. This situation can also affect the financial position of customers especially when an employee uses personal information of clients for selfish gain. Whistleblowing in the medical field can be beneficial because it can save the lives of patients in case the unethical behavior is intended to harm them (Kaplan, 2015).
Whistleblowing can be used to enhance corporate social responsibility. Immoral actions that are harmful could be reported and therefore avoid the risks as well as damages that customers and other concerned parties could have faced. One such an example of whistleblowing is in the case of Beech-Nut Nutrition Corporation. A former director of research and development realized that the prices of apples that were used in making juices were subtle. He sought answers about these prices and had a doubt about the legality of these apples. He had suspected that the apples were a synthetic substitute. He went ahead and visited the supplier of the apples and was shocked to find that there was only a warehouse and there were no real plantations. He reported this issue to the purchasing manager as well as the vice president of operation, but they took no action. This employee did not tire but also took his findings to the company’s CEO, but he also failed to take a step. This employee took a bold step and resigned from this company after where he went and reported the issue to US Food and Drug Administration(FDA). The FDA launched a full investigation into the matter and found that this was a genuine concern. This scenario is an example of how whistleblowing can be of great benefit to the society. In this example, customers were in great danger from consuming the apple juice that came from chemical substitutes. The whistleblower helped in stopping this unethical practice from going on (Measham, 2015).
Whistleblowing contributes to increasing the confidence of shareholders. Once fraudulent activities are reported, shareholders will see that a company has transparency since nothing is hidden. Employees feel the urge to report such unethical acts, and this will guarantee the shareholders that a company cannot deceive them since employees will certainly disclose those actions once they discover that a company has been defrauding shareholders. Shareholders can, therefore, invest in such an organization as opposed to a team that keeps silent on unethical behavior. Whistleblowing helps in protecting the capital that has been contributed by these shareholders
Whistleblowing ensures that improper behavior is exposed. When an employee gets to expose the unethical behavior of business, government, an agency or any other type of business, it will force a company to come clean about the situation that is reported. This case serves as a way of keeping organization prepared to be responsible for their actions. It also ensures that businesses comply with all laws and also act in an ethical manner. It is not possible for a single whistleblower to change all companies in the world. It is, therefore, crucial that whistleblowers be encouraged so as to ensure that most companies abide by the law and also act in a morally upright manner. Whistleblowing will, therefore, serve to make sure that businesses do not get way with doing wrong things (Measham, 2015).
Whistleblowing is a source of government intelligence. When employees expose wrongdoing, the government can know about the existence of illegal or unethical acts. This situation helps the government officials to convict such businesses or individuals. If employees do not blow the whistle, the government and other agencies can never discover the existence of unethical or illegal actions, and this will, therefore, encourage people to misuse their positions or businesses to cause harm to others.
Whistleblowing helps to ensure that wrongdoers are punished for their behavior. If people are not punished, they do not understand why a behavior is wrong. Most individuals who break the law or do unethical behavior expect to be caught. When they are not caught and punished for their wrong doing it tends to encourage them and therefore they can continue doing the same since they know that no one is seeing that they are doing bad things. Further, if such people are not caught, held responsible for their actions and punished in the most appropriate manner they can keep on repeating their wrongful actions. It is, therefore, vital for whistleblowing to be encouraged so as to ensure that unethical people learn their lesson.
While blowers try, protect their reputation when they report illegal or unethical activities. When one fails to report these activities, people could think that they were also involved in the activities. Further, reputation is tarnished once it is discovered that they had the information about the unethical or illegal activities going on. Sometimes it is not even true that an employee who witnesses the unethical or illegal activity going on was involved in it. The failure to report can also cause severe consequences to an employee. It is, therefore, important that employees be encouraged to report bad behavior in the workplace (Miceli, 2013).
Whistleblowing can help bring positive change in a company. A whistleblower is an individual who is interested in the success of the business he works for. He/she, therefore, sees himself or herself to be part of the company. The individual works hard to contribute to the attainment of a company’s goals. He /she is interested in seeing the company’s future secure and promising. Such an employee will not hesitate to report wrongdoing if they see it. An individual would uncover such actions to bring positive change to the organization. It is an attempt to improve the company so that it can be better.
Whistleblowing helps in stopping a reckless behavior. Some employees are given the position to manage the resources of a company. Sometimes they can misuse these resources by stealing and selling them for selfish gain. If such actions are uncovered, they can be very helpful in curbing wastage of a company’s resources.
Whistleblowing helps to prevent legal repercussions that could occur if a company is convicted of unethical or illegal actions. Lawsuits come with fines, imprisonment and other negative consequences. When a company takes action when an employee blows the whistle internally, the company can correct the behavior before it gets out of hand thereby preventing these losses (Near, 2016).
Unethical behavior has increased in the recent times. It is inevitable to have employees or even leaders involved in corrupt activities or other illegal activities. Whistleblowing helps in moderating these events. If whistle blowing is discouraged many businesses and individuals would do things that they do without being questioned. Wrong behavior would prevail, and therefore companies and people would no longer be trusted. Such a world is trying to live and excel, and that is why whistleblowing is important as it preserves moral standards in the society.
Whistleblowing helps to improve fairness in an organization. A company will, therefore, be in a position to treat its employees well since they know that the failure to do so will expose t6hem to the public and the reputation would be compromised. Whistleblowing, therefore, ensures that the employee’s right of free speech is upheld. The health and safety of employees will be observed if the climate of freedom of expression is upheld.
Whistleblowing encourages business to be ethical, and ethics helps in giving an organization competitive advantage. Consumers will be in a position to trust those products that are ethical. This situation is likely to increase customer loyalty even when a company is experiencing difficult situations. For instance, Johnson & Johnson spent millions of dollars in 1982 recalling its best-selling brand after someone had tampered with the product. After someone had reported this incidence, the company followed its ethical values and recreated the product. This situation increased consumer confidence in spite of the scandal. The company realized its social responsibility and acted and this benefited the society significantly.
Cons of whistle-blowing
There are various cons that are associated with the issue of whistle-blowing at the workplace. The whistleblowers are known to go public when some of the things done within the organization or an institution are illegal or unethical. Despite the whistle-blowers protecting the organization against unethical behavior and practices, in most cases, they receive a negative response, and they are not considered as heroes. Ethically speaking, whistle-blowing should be encouraged, but only through the proper channels and after that particular individual has exhausted all the available avenues of addressing the issue of the management of those specific institutions. This move will ensure that they have minimized the effects that are realized from whistle-blowing (Bartlett, 2015).
Challenges in the trust are one of the cons that are associated with whistle-blowing at the workplace. A breakdown in the trust is one the effects that the whistleblowers are likely to expect at their workplace. Most institutions have clearly set guidelines and framework that is to be followed when addressing critical issues. Additionally, most institutions have developed internal communication systems aimed at ensuring that people can communicate such issues to the various departments in the company without one having to reveal their identity. The communication systems used in organizations ensure that the firm has continued to monitor itself and address all the issues facing the firm before the employees having to go elsewhere. Whistle-blowing is disadvantageous because it breaks the existing trust between the employees and the management of a particular institution. The outcome of broken trust is a tension that as a result affects the effective working condition that has been existing. Additionally, the working condition is affected by all other employees distracted and having tension on what might happen next.
Retaliation is the effect of whistle-blowing at the workplace. People who are involved in whistle-blowing have high chances of facing resentment and even hostile from their superiors and their peers in the workplace. Most of the whistleblowers are often treated as “snitch” which is a hostile treatment. The retaliation from the existing colleagues at the workplace can be traumatizing thus affecting ones’ performance and productivity at the workplace. Additionally, retaliations may get physical causing bodily injuries to the individuals who turn out to be whistleblowers. An increase in the retaliation may also cause an individual become humiliated to the extent that they quit their job since the workplace environment is no longer accommodative to them. The retaliation in the workplace to the whistle-blowers leads to the alienation that leads to stilted conditions and awkward social surrounding. Most of the superiors treat whistle-blowers in a stilted manner. In some organizations, whistle-blowers may also be forced to relinquish leadership positions that they hold at the institution and also be denied various responsibilities (Bjørkelo, 2013). In some institutions, whistle-blowers are often denied the opportunity to access information belonging to the firm that they initially had access. Colleagues feel disinclined to perform or share negative news or any information with the whistle-blowers for fear of being exposed.
Damages to the employers is another effect that is associated with the act of whistle-blowing at the workplace. Whistleblowing may have a negative effect on the employer hence resulting in financial turmoil. The same whistle-blowing may have effects on the public relations of the employer. Most firms end up losing profits as a result of a reduction in the stock values of the company due to the negative picture painted to the public. The damage to the employer is also likely to have an effect on the employees as well as the whistle-blower both professionally and financially. The long-term consequence of whistle-blowing are in often cases on the contrary to what is best for the company at that time.
Whistle-blowing may bring about litigation problems to the person involved for violating the confidentiality of the firm. Some institutions usually protect the whistle-blowers from job loss. However, lawsuits that are related to confidentiality that the employee signed on their employment contract may be used against them. The confidentiality clause in the employment contract must be observed especially when reporting activities occurring within a corporate environment. Activities that are not ethical and other corrupt activities within the corporate environment are supposed to be reported to the right authorities rather than being exposed to the public (Davis, 2013).
Whistle-blowing may be viewed as a noble act, but it might result to industry blacklisting. Whistle-blowers are often at risk of not getting employed again in the same industry. Most employers may be reluctant to employ a person who has been involved in whistle-blowing since they may repeat the same in their new workplace. Employers are keen on the situation and tend to avoid getting involved with whistle-blowers since they do not adhere to the right channels of addressing such problems at the workplace. Whistle-blowers in most cases opt to leave the field or the industry they have been working entirely because employers are reluctant to hire them. Most whistle-blowers find themselves in entry-level positions in the different field. In extreme cases, the whistle-blowers are denied opportunities of promotion which end up hurting their career further.
Whistle-blowers may be subjected threats from the persons involved especially in the high-profile cases. Exposing people especially in positions such as the political ones or any other top offices may lead to the whistle-blowers receiving threats for their lives. These actions threats make whistle-blowers live a life of fear for their lives because of telling the truth. In extreme cases, some whistle-blowers have ended up living in exile and others being killed for exposing unethical activities in firms. The threats issued may also be directed to the family of the whistleblowers which is frustrating and traumatizing. The act makes families of the involved in the whistle-blowing to live with fear for their lives because they are uncertain about what might happen to them (Farag, 2016).
Whistle-blowers are in some cases subjected to unfair treatment such as receiving referrals to the psychiatrist. Referrals to the psychiatrists for the whistle-blowers are aimed at humiliating them further so as to appear as if they are not in their right senses. Most of the people in authority make force these referrals to the whistle-blowers with the objective of making them scared and so that they can retract the statement already given to the public. Further, these referrals may ruin the reputation of an individual because some of the people may start to think that whistle-blowers utterances were baseless and they said those words because they were not in their right state of mind (Farag, 2016). The whistle-blowers are shamed at their workplace and appear timid for their actions which humiliate them further. These referrals to the psychiatrist make them withdrawn and stressed.
Whistle-blowing affects the running of an organization because the whistle-blower may be one of the talented employees and may end up leaving their position or underperforming. The information that is given by the whistle-blower may not always be accurate. In some cases, the information has misguided the concerns raised by the whistle-blowers may lead to other problems that are deeper in the organization. The loss of the whistle-blower as an employer may also lead to employees underperforming or failing to report unethical concerns for fear of victimization. These are actions that later lead to the downfall of an organization that initially was doing well in the industry. Whistle-blowers are viewed as threat and individuals who are misguided. Management and the other employees may have a perception that a whistle-blower is aiming at destroying a firm that is worthwhile an act that may cost their jobs and their reputation. The whistle-blowers in these organizations start to be regarded as traitors and malcontent destroying the career of other and the reputation of an esteemed organization. Others view them as enemies of progress since they go against the group of an employee whom the work together (Kaplan, 2015).
The act of whistle-blowing may affect the health of an individual especially psychologically. Whistle-blowers go through a series of traumatizing and stressful situations. These situations cause them to be affected by stress, and other get into a depression. Every individual appears to be against the whistle-blowers, and this state makes them feel unwanted and as if they do not belong to that society. Stress and depression can affect their health and may be costly to seek medication so as to contain the situation. Some of the whistle-blowers never recover from their condition not unless they seek specialized treatment for their condition thus spending much money that could have been used in other development activities.
Whistle-blowing may also be costly to the whistle-blower which may drain them financially. The lawsuits related to the whistle-blowing may be expensive for the whistle-blowers to foot. The high cost of the legal suits drains the whistle-blowers financially which is a negative impact on them. Additionally, if the whistle-blower had given information that is not reliable and resulted to tainting of the company’s name of the reputation of some people, hey may be forced to pay for the damages which are also draining financially. The legal bills are huge making the impact of whistle-blowing economically to be huge (Measham, 2015).
The whistle-blowers are often subjected to anxiety and strain after reporting the cases of fraud because the cases are usually filed under the court seal. The whistle-blowers are denied the chance of ever disclosing whether the lawsuit exists to any individual. The reason as to why the whistle-blowers are prohibited from disclosing the information is to allow for the government to independently conduct its investigation on various allegations that have been made by the whistle-blower. Being denied to discuss the case with friends, family, and other co-workers can be extremely difficult since the same leads to a feeling of isolation as the case progresses.
The after an investigation into the whistle-blowers’ claim, their identity is released to the public a fact that makes their lives unbearable. Putting the whistle-blower in the public domain may have adverse effects and may also affect their employment. The act could also have consequences on the social life of the whistleblower which is humiliating (Near, 2016).
Another negative effect of whistle-blowing to an individual is the fact that these cases may take several years to be resolved. Further, the results of the investigation are not in any way predictable. The length of the whole process of investigation is long and may be extremely taxing to the whistleblower. These results of the investigation may come to the contrary of the expectations of the whistleblowers. The chances of appealing are rare that making one to be forced to pay the court fees, the costs of investigation, other litigation costs, and even damages to the involved parties and persons (Miceli, 2013). These financial strains and the length of the cases have caused many whistleblowers to the affected mentally and others even committing suicide for the lack of resort and living in an environment that is unforgiving.
Whistle-blowing is an act that will cause people to start digging into the personal life of the whistle-blower. Most of the people seek to discredit the source of that information thus getting involved in the investigation of the personal life of the whistle-blower. Almost everything related to the whistle-blower is brought to the public even issues that are not related to that particular case. Some people choose to look at individual’s life with infinite details, and they magnify aspect of ones’ life for all to see. The goal of digging into the personal life of the whistle-blower is to make sure that no one believes the source or the information presented. Others dig into the personal life of individual so as to deviate the attention of the public to matter that is less important to the case at hand.
Another effect of whistleblowing at the workplace is that not everyone will think of it as being a positive decision to make. The perception of people at a workplace usually varies because some may feel that the actions are not aligned with the expectations of the of the firm. Outside, the workplace, the act of whistle-blowing may not be accepted by everyone as a morally right thing to do. Some of the people might accuse the whistle-blower of using the opportunity to destroy the reputation of the firm. Others link the whistleblowers with prominent or politicians and end up saying that they were paid to taint the name of a good company. Others in the society may view the whistleblower as being deviant and an irresponsible individual who is unable to adhere to the framework that has been set to address various issues in the organization. In fact, some may be regarded by the society as “outlaws” and as individuals who are just interested in gaining publicity which may always not be true (Davis, 2013).
Conclusion
Whistleblowing is an act whereby an individual exposes fraudulent, illegal, dishonest, and other unethical practices occurring at the workplace. Whistleblowing can be either be done internally or externally. Internal whistleblowing is whereby the whistleblower exposes unethical activities that happen within the organization to the authorities within the organization. External whistleblowers expose fraudulent activities externally to the government regulators, media, or the police. There are some pros that are related to whistleblowing at the workplace such as it is an ethically correct decision to make. Additionally, whistleblowers may be entitled to rewards and even legal protection. Whistleblowing also enhances Corporate Social Responsibility, and even increasing the confidence of the stakeholders. However, there are cons associated with whistleblowing such as personal risks, damages to the reputation of a firm, fines imposed by the by the regulators, and harming the profitability of the company among others.
References
Bartlett, M. L. (2015). Type of fraud and whistleblowing anonymity: Do situational factors affect employees’ intent to report fraud? . (Doctoral dissertation, CAPELLA UNIVERSITY).
Bjørkelo, B. (2013). Workplace bullying after whistleblowing: future research and implications. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 28(3), 306-323.
Davis, M. (2013). Whistleblowing. The International Encyclopedia of Ethics.
Farag, D. M. (2016). A Taxing Process: Whistleblowing under the IRS Reward Program. . Southern Law Journal, 26(1),, 19.
Kaplan, S. E. (2015). Discussant Comment on Whistleblowing Intentions of Lower-Level Employees: The Effect of Reporting Channel, Bystanders, and Wrongdoer Power Status by Jingyu Gao, Robert Greenberg, Bernard Wong-On-Wing. Journal of Business Ethics, 126 (1), 101.
Measham, F. (2015). Whistleblowing and other new crimes. Eureka Street,25(12), 31.
Miceli, M. P. (2013). Whistle-blowing in organizations. Psychology Press.
Near, J. P. (2016). After the wrongdoing: What managers should know about whistleblowing. Business Horizons, 59(1), 105-114.