Whistle Blowing Free Essays

Blowing a whistle is considered to be immoral if done in the premises of a professional firm for the outsiders; consequently, the choice of blowing a whistle is a major problem in engineering. It is the duty of an engineer to tell others about the harm it contains if the boss or the clients are unable to track the instructions. He must also inform about the harm when they are in favour of not only the security but also the interests of people. We will write a custom essay sample on Whistle Blowing or any similar topic only for you Order Now Being a professional, a person is empowered at a good rank. Numerous engineers who are likely to become whistle blowers will look for your suggestions; therefore, you must make sure you pay proper heed to them. Furthermore, involving the engineers in the firm offers a good environment for mutual efforts for helping whistle blowers as well as a way for those engineers who follow the principles for the welfare of all. Blowing a whistle is a realistic implementation of the moral conducts of engineers proves to be an advantage as well as helps in sustaining the honour of people including everyone who is a part of the firm. In case you are referred to by any prospective whistle blower for any suggestions, you must always try to be as pragmatic as possible and must also try to make sure that the danger which has been described is severe enough. It must also be in the form of a document. You must also find out if the seniors were referred to prior to you. Your advice must be to be point only after knowing all the above mentioned requirements as well as whether the seniors tried to deal with the issue before you (Schinzinger and Martin, 2000). Forming documents is considered to be very crucial as there are cases when any discontented worker is only looking for vengeance. So after documentation, it would be made sure that there is an issue and it must be resolved. However, there are exceptions but they are based on the case itself rather than being mentioned prior to it. A document, for instance, may not be formed when the issue is confidential or has secret information (Schinzinger Martin, 2000). As a result, it is the duty of the firm to make sure that they know about the advantages and disadvantages which are attached to prospective whistle blowers. The engineers must remember that it becomes hard for the firm to come up with a good case when a document is not formed; however, it is still possible. You must keep a purposeful point of view being a professional. Turning down the statement of the engineer about no proper proof is not must appreciated as your firm will have to face a lot of problems in the long run in case it is proved later that you knew about the problem but you did not pay much attention to it. So, in the same way, if you take part in the helping of whistle blower, then your firm may be able to get back its honour and sustain it, in case it becomes known that you were a strong part of the problem solving events of the whistle blowing issue. It is good for any firm to give suggestions to engineers as it shows that they care and results in a feeling of belonging and loyalty. There are two conflicting perceptions of people as far as whistle blowing is concerned. For some, such people are â€Å"heroic defenders of values† while others believe them to be â€Å"traitorous violators of organisational loyalty norms†. The practice of giving advice by the firm is very much in the favour of whistle blowers as people do not appreciate this habit. Whistle blowing is considered as an heroic action while it actually is that a lot of individuals get an impact made on them by the idea to cancel any procedure or a project (Bouville, 2008). Letting the prospective engineers participate in discussions with other engineers who are not a part of the events at office or chat groups for such discussions about blowing whistles must be mentioned in your website. As a result, those engineers who have been through this before will be able to talk about the problem by remaining anonymous to others. There are codes of standards like for engineers, their functions to be performed, their loyalty, those individuals who control the engineers, how the engineers must perform for the public and the cost-benefit study about blowing whistle can be talked about generally. With the help of this, the prospective whistle blowers will be able to look for suggestions by their fellows prior to consulting the professionals in your firm. The advantages of blowing a whistle are not only limited to the engineer but also their boss and his firm. A firm that lacks strong values for the engineers is likely to have poor employment and involvement of their workers. There is a code of standards for every professional firm. Its purpose is to ensure that there is equality among all as well as everyone is aware of how to behave. â€Å"Why should we be bothered? † is the most common reaction to the procedures which have been put forward for dealing with the habit of blowing whistles. According to Davis, there must be a standard of ethics as it helps the engineers in terms of their behaviour, moral judgement as well as it helps them in understanding their profession (Thinking like an Engineer, 1991). Every professional firm must work for engineering professionals as they communicate with them in a number of ways. Every professional firm has a set of standards which must be followed by all its engineers. According to the NSPE (National Society of Professional Engineers, the engineers must not harm the integrity of the professional firm they work in, in any way. They must also not harm the way other people work or find fault in their work. In case, any engineer feels that others are not working properly of they are not following the ethics of workplace, then they should go and talk to the higher authority so they will look into it (Schinzinger and Martin, 2000). Everyone working at the firm must follow the ethics even those who are looking into any problem. In case any prospective whistle blower fulfils the above conditions and gets considerable encouragement from the chat forum on website, then the firm must provide assistance for the welfare of ethics of engineering. According to Davis, ethics and standards must be recognized and valued by the person completely or else they will not be successful (Thinking like an Engineering, 1991). The employees of the professional firm must follow the standard or its advantages will not be attained of engineering being a very organized profession. The primary principle of NSPE (National Society of Professional Engineering) encourages serving the public while the fourth principle encourages serving the boss. There is consent between Bouville and Harris that not only security but the health and interests of people must be kept foremost. On the other hand, it is also very important for a professional organization that they work and promote professional fraternity which helps in performing duty for the people as well as for one another (Bouville, 2008). Blowing a whistle is not always about trial and error but choices can be made with the help of standards which sustain the professional honour by keeping one’s own point of view aside. It is the duty of professional engineers to follow the code of ethics of their firm (Davis, 1991). They must not only follow the ethics inside their office but also outside it. They must sustain the behaviour especially in those firms where united man power works. The professional firm you work in offers you a cover under which you can work well and deal with the clients and people in a better way as well as you offer advantages to them. In case whistle blowing is needed for this act, then the professional firm should help the engineer as it will bring benefits in the long run. References Davis, M (1991). Thinking Like an Engineer: The Place of a Code of Ethics in the Practice of a Profession. Philosophy and Public Affairs  [online]. 20, [Accessed 2 January 2012 ], p. 150-167. Available from: . Bouville, M. (2008). `Whistle-Blowing and Morality’. Journal of Business Ethics  81(3):579-585. Schinzinger, R. , Martin, M (2000). Chapter 5: Workplace responsibilities and rights. FROM: Schinzinger, R. , Martin, M,  Introduction to Engineering Ethics. Boston: McGraw-Hill, pp 167-184. How to cite Whistle Blowing, Essay examples Whistle Blowing Free Essays A whistleblower is someone that raises a concern about a wrongdoing that is happening in their company or organization. There are many things that the whistleblower can reveal such as the breaking of laws, exposing fraud, corruption, or health and safety violations. These allegations can expressed to the people that run the company or organization and they can be expressed to the outside world such as the media or law enforcement. We will write a custom essay sample on Whistle Blowing or any similar topic only for you Order Now The whistleblower normally faces reprisal from their company, related organizations, or sometimes from the law. Whistle blowing happens when people get caught between business and social responsibility. They have to decide what is best for the business and what is best for the world. In the Insider Big tobacco denies that nicotine is an addictive drug. Jeff Wigand is a tobacco executive and has to decide whether or not give an interview with 60 minutes about cigarettes and if nicotine is and addictive drug or not. Jeff signed a confidentiality agreement with his company saying that he will not disclose any information about nicotine. Even though he is fired and receives death threats, Jeff decides to give the interview and whistle blow on his company by exposing the facts about nicotine that his company was hiding. There are three elements in whistle blowing and when these elements are combined they make whistle blowing very bitter and distaste full. They are dissent, accusation, and breach of loyalty. Dissent is a disagreement with a superior or the majority which can be hard to do in a work environment. Whistle blowing’s dissent is shedding light on a risk and assigning responsibility for the risk. The whistleblower also accuses someone of who is often higher on the corporate ladder than him. When he accuses this person it is like he calls that person a foul and that gets the strongest reaction from that person and they try to defend themselves. The whistleblower is calling out his own colleagues and this is seen as a breach of loyalty because he has certain obligations to his colleagues and this loyalty is put against the public interest. There are many different views on when it is appropriate to whistle blow. Michael McFarland uses a study by Simon, Powers, and Gunneman that there are four factors that must be present in order to morally require someone to go and help another person. They are that there is a critical need for the help, is within the â€Å"network of social relations† which means a person duty to family, friends and so on, the ability to help without damage to self, and the lack of other sources of help. McFarland states suggests that engineers should be held to a higher standard of social responsibility than ordinary individuals but the responsibility should be dispersed among all of the members of the engineering society instead of just an individual engineer. He uses the example of Kitty Genovese. Kitty was murdered and many people in her apartment building either watched or listened and did nothing. It has been argued that had the neighbors banned together they could have prevented the murder. McFarland uses this example to show that when no other sources of help are available that engineers should take responsibility by banding together. McFarland encourages engineers to change their thinking of individual responsibility to the responsibility of the engineering profession on a broader level. Richard De George states that loyalty to the company is the most important thing for a person to have. He gives three requirements for a person to have permissibility to whistle blow which are as follows. If harm to the public will be serous and considerable, if the person informs their superiors of the problem and nothing is done, and if the person informs everyone above them on the cooperate ladder and nothing is done. George also gives requirements for when whistle blowing is a moral obligation of a person. They include the three previously stated requirements and that the person has documentation about their concern and that there is strong evidence that making their concerns know to the public will stop the problem. This seems like good criteria for a person to whistle blow but this approach can take a long time to complete because sometimes informing all the people above the whistleblower on the cooperate ladder can be an extensive process. This caused the Challenger disaster. The shuttle that was launched prior to the challenger had many time because of weather and mechanical factors. NASA did not want delay the launch of the Challenger so the launch pad could be refurbished on time and so it would launch at the same time as President Reagan gave his State of the Union address. The Challenger uses solid rocket boosters with solid fuel to overcome Earth’s gravity. These boosters are assembled with four segments that are held together by two O rings. The O rings keep hot gas from escaping from the motor. Heat putty is used to separate the rubber rings and the hot gases. Engineers discover that the O rings may not be able to keep the boosters sealed at temperatures lower than 40o F and they brought this up to their superiors. The superiors disagreed and thought that the O rings would hold regardless of the temperature. The night before the launch the temperature dropped greatly below the safety limits of the O rings. Ice formed on the pad and some fell on a booster cooling it to 28o F causing the seal to fail. The shuttle was launched and fifty nine seconds later the shuttle exploded. Had the engineers whistle blowed instead of bringing up the problem all of their superiors then the shuttle may have not launched. While they did not have enough low temperature data to prove that it was dangerous to launch, they also did not have enough data to prove that it was safe enough to launch. Had they gone to the media there may have been enough public support against the launch for NASA to delay it. We will never know. What we do know is that informing all of the engineer’s superiors took too long and the engineers did not have enough time to try and find another way to stop the shuttle launch. The National Society of Professional Engineers’ Code of Ethics for engineers has six fundamental cannons that state that for engineers to fulfill their professional duties they must, hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public, perform services only in areas of their competence, issue public statements only in an objective and truthful manner, act for each employer or client as faithful agents or trustees, avoid deceptive acts, and conduct themselves honorably, responsibly, ethically, and lawfully so as to enhance the honor, reputation, and usefulness of the profession. The first principle states that an engineer has the duty to the public’s safety, health and welfare before a duty to a client or employer. This keeps an engineer protected in the event of whistle blowing. Some codes even go as far as disciplining or revoking the engineer’s license if the engineer fails to report something that the engineer knew was not in the public’s best interest. Having this principle in the Code of Ethics has help justify whistle blowing by engineers and has the courts often side with engineer, overruling confidentiality agreements and duties to employers that in the past would have prevented the engineer from speaking out. I believe that whistle blowing is a necessary part of being an engineer. It gives the engineer some power over the company or organization that has hired them. If the company fears that the engineer may go and tell the public things that the company does that are harmful to the public, the company will try to avoid doing things that are harmful to the public. While whistle blowing is often times distasteful and hard to do, it is often a necessity. There are companies in the world that only care about making a profit and do not worry about the public’s health. These companies need the help of engineers to design their projects which gives the engineers insight that the public will not have. While the engineers have loyalty to the company that they work for, it is also the engineers’ duty to the public to make sure that the company acts in the public’s best interest. And if the engineers can not convince the company that what they are doing is wrong, then it is time to bring the act to the public’s attention. How to cite Whistle Blowing, Papers