whistle blowing is informing on illegal and unethical practices in the work place is becoming increasingly common as employees speak out about their ethical concerns at work.
It can have disastrous consequences for the individual, as well as threatening the survival of the organization that is being complained about.
Corporations in democratic societies are run with the expectations that they will function in ways that are compatible with the public interest.
Corporations in democratic societies are also run with the expectations that they will not only obey the law governing their activities, but will not do anything that undermines basic democratic processes, such as bribing public officials.
Because ones obligation to the public overrides one’s obligation to maintain secrecy.
If the arguments which I have just made are valid then the position of whistle blowing is never justified because it involves a violation of loyalty and confidentiality, or that whistle blowing is always right because it is an exercise of the right to free speech and is morally justified. the situation of sufficient moral importance to justify whistle-blowing? Components of a whistle-blowing policy A well-designed whistle-blowing policy should include the following: 1. Then the obligation a person has to prevent avoidable harm to others overrides any obligations of confidentiality and loyalty, making it an obligation to blow the whistle on illegal or unethical acts.It has also been argued that whistle blowing is always justified because it is an exercise of the right to free speech. An example to shout “Fire” in a crowded theater because that is likely to cause a panic in which people may be injured.Similarly, one may have a right to speak out on a particular subject, in the sense that there are no contractual agreements which prohibit him/her from doing so, but it may be the case that it would be morally wrong for one to do so because it would harm innocent people, such as one’s fellow workers and stockholders who are not responsible for the wrongdoing being disclosed.Such as obligations of confidentiality and loyalty cannot take precedence over the fundamental duty to act in ways that prevent unnecessary harm to others.Agreements to keep something secret have no moral standing unless the secret is itself morally justifiable.In addition to having the obligation to make money for stockholders, corporate executives have the obligation to see that these obligations are complied within an organization.They also have obligations to the company’s employees, for example to maintain a safe working place. a company even though most of the time whistle blowing is justified. If people like Agent Rowley stop blowing the whistle, there will be more days like ...Unless it can be shown that the harm to the employees and stockholders would be significantly greater than the harm caused by the organizational wrong doing, the obligation to avoid unnecessary harm to the public must come first.This must be true even when there is specific agreements not to speak out.Further more, the moral principles that you must consider all people’s interests equally prohibits giving preference to one’s own group.So there most be considered justification for not giving as much weight to the interest of the stockholders investing in corporate firms because they do so with the knowledge that they take on financial risk if management acts illegally or immorally.