Whistleblowing has been a topic of discussion in business for over a hundred years. While there are federally mandated regulations in place to protect whistleblowers, some still argue that whistleblowing is wrong. The main argument of these naysayers, like Norman Bowie and Sissela Bok, is that whistleblowing is an act of disloyalty to the company. In Ronald Duska’s article Whistleblowing II, he takes opposition to this stance. Throughout his article he makes three main points: employees have no obligation to remain loyal to a company, the primary function of business is profit, and the analogy between business and team is erroneous. It’s important to consider the types of groups where loyalty is appropriate. Bok says, “since (the whistleblower)
…show more content…
Loyalty within a team is in the context of a sport/competition; in which the goal is winning. In general, sport is a social convention and winning in sport is harmless. “One can lose at sport with precious few serious consequences. The consequences of losing at business are much more serious” (Duska, 5). A business cannot be compare to a team because (as in sport) we voluntarily join a team and accept the risks of being a part of it. Everyone is forced to participate in business. “(Businesses) are not controlled and are not over after a specific time. The activities of business affect the lives of everyone, not just the (employees)” (Duska, 5). Sports are in fact controlled by referees (whistleblowers), are contained to a restricted period of time, and do not directly affect anyone who is not playing the game. Duska reveals an understanding for why corporations compare themselves to a team (to appeal to team loyalty), but states that it is seriously …show more content…
I believe that there are situations where employees have an obligation to remain loyal to their company. One example is when your employer pays (or assists in paying) for your education. If your employer pays for you to get your MBA, you should feel obligated to spend at least a few years at the company. After all, they are investing in you and are expecting a return on their investment. With that said, employees are contractually bound to fulfill their contract with their employers as long as the contract was agreed upon without coercion (Sandel). Employment contracts should involve a simple exchange of labor and money; it should never require more. “One sells one’s labor but not one’s self to a company” (Duska, 4). As employees we have a responsibility to exchange reasonable work for fair wages – we are being paid for our labor, not our
Loyalty within a team is in the context of a sport/competition; in which the goal is winning. In general, sport is a social convention and winning in sport is harmless. “One can lose at sport with precious few serious consequences. The consequences of losing at business are much more serious” (Duska, 5). A business cannot be compare to a team because (as in sport) we voluntarily join a team and accept the risks of being a part of it. Everyone is forced to participate in business. “(Businesses) are not controlled and are not over after a specific time. The activities of business affect the lives of everyone, not just the (employees)” (Duska, 5). Sports are in fact controlled by referees (whistleblowers), are contained to a restricted period of time, and do not directly affect anyone who is not playing the game. Duska reveals an understanding for why corporations compare themselves to a team (to appeal to team loyalty), but states that it is seriously …show more content…
I believe that there are situations where employees have an obligation to remain loyal to their company. One example is when your employer pays (or assists in paying) for your education. If your employer pays for you to get your MBA, you should feel obligated to spend at least a few years at the company. After all, they are investing in you and are expecting a return on their investment. With that said, employees are contractually bound to fulfill their contract with their employers as long as the contract was agreed upon without coercion (Sandel). Employment contracts should involve a simple exchange of labor and money; it should never require more. “One sells one’s labor but not one’s self to a company” (Duska, 4). As employees we have a responsibility to exchange reasonable work for fair wages – we are being paid for our labor, not our