this question in human recourse,

can you help please ,but the answers should be in detail

Ethics and Social Responsibility Case

A New Concern for Human Resource Managers: Whistle-Blowing

Each year Time dedicates a front cover of its magazine to a Person of the Year. Lastyear, for example, New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuilani was given such an honor for his handling of New Yorks 9/11 terrorist crisis. This year Time expanded its version ofthe person of the year. It dedicated its cover to Persons of the Year. The magazineidentified three women working in unrelated fields who had at least one common

characteristicthey were all Whistle-Blowers.

The term whistle-blower is defined by the third edition of The American Heritage

College Dictionary as One who brings wrong doing within an organization to light.

The etymology of the term whistle-blower is quite interesting and can be attributed to several sources: the police used whistles in early times as a communication signal and

trains used their whistles to communicate warning signals. Today, the term whistleblower

has a mixed meaning: it can have a negative connation in certain sectors with whistle-blowers being called, among other words, traitor, turncoat, and rat. Or, it can have a positive connation with whistle-blowers being called heroes.

The three women profiled as Times Persons of the Year fall into that latter category.

They did the right thing by informing their respective bosses of wrongdoings such as

mismanagement, law breaking, and fraud. In essence, these brave women refused to keep their eyes and mouths closed.

Persons of the Year

Coleen Rowley (FBI); Sherron Watkins (Enron); and Cynthia Cooper (WorldCom)

three career womenall worked for very high profile organizations and all were whistleblowers.

Rowley, an FBI staff attorney, after keeping quiet about the agencys

failure to take seriously a situation regarding French Moroccan Zacarias Moussaoui, the

so-called 19th terrorist involved in the destruction of the World Trade Centers in New

York, drafted a memo about the situation and gave copies to FBI Director Robert Mueller

and two members of the Senate Intelligence Committee. Cooper, a WorldCom vice

president, informed the board of WorldCom about inflated profit of nearly $4 billion

through its accounting practices; and finally Watkins, an Enron vice president, informed

Enron Chairman Kenneth Lay about improper accounting methods used by the company.

Like all whistle blowers, these three women placed themselves in very precarious positions with regard to physical and emotional health, privacy, and especiallyemployment, since these women were the main financial supporters of their

Householdstwo of them had stay at home husbands.

Rowley who had spent nearly 23 years at the FBI and was some two years away from

Retirement was subjected to verbal backlashes and criticism from co-workers. Some of

her colleagues compared her to recently convicted FBI agent and spy Robert Hanson.

Fallout from Watkinss letter to Enrons Chairman Lay eventually led her to resign from

her $165,000 job last November. As a result of Coopers revelation, nearly 20,000

WorldCom employees lost their jobs and shareholders lost some $3 billion.

Whistle-blowing has resulted in terrible and even fatal endings. Two examples: in 1976,

Karen Silkwood, a chemical technician at Keer-McGee plutonium fuels production plant

in Crestcent, Oklahoma, paid with her life. She died mysteriously in a one-car automobile

crash after bringing to light problems about falsifying quality control reports on nuclear

fuel rods. More recently, in 1995, Dr. Jeffery Wigand, vice president of research and

development at Brown & Williams Tobacco Corporation, revealed what most people

thought they already knewthere is a causal relationship between tobacco and cancer

and tobacco is addictive; his company fired him summarily. However, he was been

publicly vindicated when his story was aired on CBSs 60 Minutes on February 4, 1996.

For Silkwood, Wigand, and others who willingly tell on the bosses it still means career

suicidewith no applause. As recently as August 2002, a survey conducted by the

National Whistle-Blowing Center in Washington, DC found that 200 employees were

fired after reporting misconduct; others who remained in their companies faced internal

demotions; while others whistle-blowers were blackballed in their industry, unable to find

any work in that sector. Experts have offered four simple questions for anyone thinking

about whistle-blowing. First, the whistle-blower should ask the question: Is this the

only way? Second, do I have the goods? Third, why am I doing this? And finally,

am I ready (for the consequences)?

Just recently the federal government has gone to some lengths to protect whistle-blowers

with the enactment of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act 2002. This act provides whistle-blowers

with legal protection:

An executive who retaliates against a whistle-blower can be criminally

liable and imprisoned for up to 10 years. The Labor Department can order

a company to rehire an employee without going to court. And fired workers

who feel their cases are moving too slowly can request a federal jury trialafter six months.

In addition, under a federal whistle-blowing statute, whistle-blowers are entitled to 14

percent of corporate-government settlements. Douglas Durand, vice president for sales at

TAP Pharmaceutical Products Inc., uncovered a conspiracy to bribe doctors who agreed

to prescribe Lupron, a TAP drug product for prostate cancer. Based on information

provided by Durand about the company and medical doctors conspiring to cheat the

government out of millions of dollars, TAP settled with federal prosecutors for $875

million in fines. Durand won a $77 million settlement as allowed under the federal

whistle-blower statute. Perhaps whistle-blowers now have some rights as a result of the

federal governments actions.

Student name:

1. To what degree can human resource managers aid whistle-blowers?

2. Should whistle-blowers be compensated for telling on their bosses and firms?

3. Is there a better term for whistle-blower?

4. Should all whistle-blowers be treated as heroes?