What is the difference between someone who knew of wrongdoing and said nothingand someone who did not know of the wrongdoing but who would not have said

anything either had he known?

The difference is CIRCUMSTANCES: one had to make a decision and the other did not have to. Had the circumstances been identical, they would have acted identically. But the circumstances are independent of them, so that praise and blame depend partly on chance. (Nagel, 1979; Williams, 1981)

The Ethics ofWHISTLEBLOWING

West Visayas State UniversityMasters in Public GovernanceMPG 510: Public Sector Ethics and Accountability in the Public Service

Reported by: Christine Liz JImenea

https://www.google.com.ph/search?q=whistleblower&biw=1366&bih=667&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=0ahUKEwiQo7Dj87_JAhULUo4KHdV8A5EQ_AUIBigB#imgrc=hfmwJKYFFJmGQM%3A

Whistle blowing is an act, for an employee ( or former employee), of disclosing what he believes to be unethical or illegal behaviour to higher management ( internal whistle blowing) or to an external authority or the public ( external whistle blowing).

CONTENTS:

Definition Whistleblowing in the Public sector Whistleblowing in the Office What the Law Says About Whistleblowing? What’s Ethical About Whistle Blowing? Whistle Blowing and Morality

The barriers to a successful internal whistleblowing program are: A lack of trust in the internal system Unwillingness of employees to be "snitches"

Misguided union solidarity

Belief that management is not held to the same standard

Fear of retaliation

Fear of alienation from peers

Whistle blowing calls attention to the wrongdoing thatis occurring within an organization, whether in public or private sector.

The Government Accountability Project lists four ways to blow the whistle:

• reporting wrongdoing or a violation of the law to the proper authorities such as a supervisor, a hotline or an Inspector General

• refusing to participate in workplace wrongdoing

• testifying in a legal proceeding

• leaking evidence of wrongdoing to the media

But because government, by its very nature, is supposed to be open and transparent, full disclosure of unethical or illegal behavior in the public sphere is particularly important.

Not all of the problems in the public sphere are, however, generated within the government organization; outside vendors, contractors, and individuals can participate in and even breed government corruption.

Jose Barredoa self-confessed “runner” in the P728-million fertilizer fund scam

T/Sgt. Vidal Doble. Jr."Project Lighthouse" were shocked to hear President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo speak with Virgillio Garcilliano about the rigging of poll results.. “Hello Garci ” case

Mary “Rosebud” OngInvolvement of Senator Panfilo “Ping” Lacson in the unsolved death of publicist Bubby Dacer and his driver: Dacer-Corbito case

WHAT DOES WHISTLE BLOWING HAVE TO DO WITH ETHICS?

Whistle blowing has to do with ethics because it represents a person’s understanding, at a deeplevel, that an action his or her organization is taking is harmful—that it interferes with people’s rights or is unfair or detracts from the common good.

Whistle blowing also calls upon the virtues, especially courage, as standing up for principles can be a punishing experience. Even though laws are supposed to protect whistle blowers from retaliation, people who feel threatened by the revelations can ostracize the whistle blower, marginalizing or even forcing him or her out of public office.

On the other hand, there have been occasions when the role of whistle blower has actually catapulted people into higher office and has earned the respect of constituents.

A Whistle blower in a Californian court

HOW CAN GOVERNMENT ENCOURAGE WHISTLE BLOWING?

• Lilanthi Ravishankar makes a useful distinction between external and internal whistle blowing. She argues that companies should encourage internal whistle blowing so that problems are solved within the organization before employees feel they must go outside to get action.

• The same is true for government bodies, which need to know about problems early—before illegal contracts must be renegotiated or aquifers have been polluted or the public’s money has been squandered or unethical behavior has become front-page news.

WHISTLE BLOWING &MORALITY

MATHIEU BOUVILLE

Morality- can be a body of standards or principles derived froma code of conduct from a particular philosophy, religion, or cultureor it can be derived from a standard that a person believes should be universal (Wikipedia)

Different Perspective on Whistle Blowing...

-Whistle blowing is a “new form of worker resistance” relevant to the“unending battle between labor and management to control theworkplace” (Rothschild and Miethe, 1999)

-According to the Code of the National Society of ProfessionalEngineering ( duty to the public should trump the fourth canon (duty to the employer): the health, safety and welfare of the publicare to be placed first.

-It is acceptable to blow the whistle to protect the public interest, but not to exact revenge upon fellow employees, supervisors orcompany ( Fleddermann, 1999)

Over half of the whistle blowers

who were interviewed had family problems

2/3 of whistle blowers “ lost their job or were forced to retire ”or “were blacklisted from

getting another jobIn the field

84% suffered from severe

Depression or Anxiety

2/3 of them had severe financial

problems

2/3 had “declining physical health”

Being a HERO versus being a MARTYR

“Everybody would want to be a hero but nobody wants to be a martyr”

When someone successfully prevents a catastrophe, we may call him a hero and envy him (even be resentful: ‘ he did not do much to deserve this, I would have done just the same’

On the other hand, we do not envy an employee who lost his job for blowing the whistle on a product that turned out to be perfectly safe. Instead, we pity him.

BLAME versus PRAISE

The collapse of the Quebec Bridge in 1907 was due to the “ selection of a design beyond the technicallyproven range”.

Christopher Columbus sailing towards the possibilityof a continent was far more foolhardy.

It failed It succeeded

Conclusion:

Professional ethics is in fact professional morality.

It leaves no room for choice or the interest of the professional.Yet the dreadful retaliations against the messengers of truthmake it necessary to bring the needs of the whistle blower back into the picture.

Morality tries to hide the obvious fact that the choice of speaking up or remaining silent is indeed a choice, not something decidedexternally: if the employee somehow has a duty not to blow thewhistle, then he cannot be blamed.

In the context of morality, what is deemed right or wrong dependson how the question is framed.

HOW TO ENCOURAGE INTERNAL WHISTLE BLOWING:

• Create a policy about reporting illegal or unethical practices, which should include:

• Formal mechanisms for reporting violations, such as hotlines and mailboxes

• Clear communications about the process of voicing concerns, such as a specific chain of command, or the identification of a specific person to handle complaints

• Clear communications about bans on retaliation

• Get endorsement of the policy from top officials—mayor, manager, councilmembers, boards—and publicize the organization’s commitment to the process. Elected and administrative leadership must encourage ethical behavior and hold everyone within the organization to the highest standards, including the disclosure of activities that would have a negative impact on the public’s business.

• Investigate and follow up promptly on all allegations of misconduct. Report on these investigations to the council or board.

• If this process does not produce results, however, it’s not enough to say, “Well, I did my best.”

If wrongdoing is not being addressed within the organization, it may be time to move outside—to the district attorney, the grand jury, or to the press.

THE ETHICS OF LEAKING INFORMATION - HANSON AND CEPPO

• The first thing a potential leaker should ask is the status of the information itself. Is the information “classified,” “proprietary,” or otherwise “protected?” Is there a system in place which clearly considers this information restricted? If the information is clearly intended to be protected, then the leaker must meet a stiff test if he or she wants to leak it.

• The second consideration is whether the potential leaker has a specific obligation, legal or ethical, to protect the information, or has the information only because another person violated his or her obligation to keep it secret. If so, then it is a much more serious matter to reveal it.

• The third consideration is whether the information is about public or private matters. Information about another’s sexual orientation, about his or her private finances, or about personal phone calls has more of a claim to privacy than information about a person’s actions as a corporate executive or a government official. The difficult cases, of course, are those where the private life of individuals arguably influences their public actions.

• On the other hand, a leaker must determine if the conduct he or she is exposing represents actual wrongdoing or if it is simply represents a policy disagreement.

• Closed-door sessions, however, are secret for a reason. Revelations about a city’s interest in a particular piece of property may boost the price of that parcel. Exposure of sensitive information about a hiring or firing decision may needlessly cause harm to an individual. As much as council or board members’ views may differ on these issues, they should remain secret if the problem does not rise to the level of misconduct.

• Hanson and Ceppos also argue that potential leakers must assess the good and harm their leak may do. When lives are at stake or millions of public dollars are being misappropriated, those concerns for the public good trump the harm to personal privacy or government secrecy.

Are there laws to protectthe whistleblower?

The Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989, Pub.L. 101-12 as amended, is a United States federal law that protects federal whistleblowers who work for the government and report agency misconduct. A federal agency violates the Whistleblower Protection Act if agency authorities take (or threaten to take) retaliatory personnel action against any employee or applicant because of disclosure of information by that employee or applicant.

Whistleblowers may file complaints that they believereasonably evidences a violation of a law, rule or regulation; gross mismanagement; gross waste of funds; an abuse of authority; or a substantial and specific danger to public health or safety.

INQUIRER.net02:55 PM February 12th, 2014

MANILA, Philippines—The House justice committee approved 5 bills strengtheningthe witness protection program and installing a whistleblowers’ protection act.the 10 bills filed calling for a whistleblowers’ protection act seek to protectand reward whistleblowers who expose corruption in government.The rewards amount to P50,000 to P200,000 depending on the stage of the case.

The measure also sought to give the secretary of the Department of Justice the power to change the identities of witnesses without need for judicial order.

The proposed law also sought to punish whistleblowers who make false allegations only to get the reward. The penalty against the fake whistleblower should be the same penalty imposed against the personfalsely accused by the whistleblower.

The whistleblowers protection bill or House Bill 5715 was passed on third andfinal reading under the 15th Congress but the Senate failed to pass its own version.

“Are you going to swallow the whistle?”

“Will you bite the hand that feed you?”