Whistleblowing

Whistleblower 23rd January Whistle blowing Describe the key characteristics of a whistleblower A whistleblower as defined by many philosophers to be a wrongdoer in different perspectives such, personality and company has numerous characteristics that makes one to be more powerful to present issues which affect the company and the whistleblower himself. The following are key characteristics of a whistleblower.
Vision-Vision is a powerful characteristic that puts the company under a big pressure because it aims at cultivating deep the corporation culture and how the company responds to the employees among other roles. Diplomacy- The whistleblower use diplomacy to create a supportive interest among different competing groups in a company (Vaughn, 2013). Flexibility- Flexibility is another characteristic of the whistleblower that ensures the company or organization is not going against the law (Vaughn, 2013). Tenacity- The whistleblower use stubbornness as a competing curiosity that must be in due course used as a tool to make a defined and right decision for the business (Gramling, 2014). Sensitivity- Most of the large business organizations have large number of employees across the country; hence, sensitivity as a characteristic of a whistleblower is important because it acts as an eye to the business (Gramling, 2014).
Instances of Whistle blowing in a Publicly Traded Company within the Last 12 Months
Within the last 12months, U. S Supreme Court has been identified to protect the employees through the voice of whistleblower. The instance to protect employees of publicly company’s contracts March 6, 2014. This was noted to be the first time in the United State of America Supreme Court protected sub-contractors and contractors under Lawson v FMRLL, 571 U. S (2014) (Gramling, 2014). Jonathan M Zang and Jackie Hosang Lawson had different case to the court, alleged retaliation unlawful under act 806 that was against the FMR LLC while the others interrelated to the private company the so-called FMR. The funds were mutually raised to provide fidelity to the family as persuaded by the contract. The two of them commenced the unlawful action in a federal district court where the private mate was moved to dismiss plaintiff’s issues. The claims supported that they were not covered as employees under the act 1514A (Vaughn, 2013). The plaintiff therefore, took forth both employees of public company and the employees of the contract and sub-contract. After complains were filed with the health administration and occupational safety, Zang and Lawson began the action of de novo in a court. The court examined the statute text and found that FMR’s interpretation was quite presentable because there was no evidence that suggested discrimination in order to define how the issues were defiled (Vaughn, 2013).
The court also found that it was important to limit the freedom of employees of public traded company (Vaughn, 2013). Zang and Lawson were justified when they forwarded the burning issues to the Supreme Court. For, this reason the first circuit found that, amendment of legislation history to be important. After these issues were reported by the whistleblowers, most of them were warned by the heads of department considering them to be stressful to the company (Gramling, 2014). However, the whistleblowers were motivated to see their issues justified finally. On the other hand, the company felt dishonored by the whistleblower (Gramling, 2014). After resolving the issues raised by the whistleblowers, the company experienced quality work from the employees (Gramling, 2014).
The whistleblower where justified in reporting the company’s action. This is because most of the action where against the human rights and labor law (Vaughn, 2013). There reporting brought to the light some of evil activities that used to take place in private and government industries. For example, sexual harassment and loss of job are contrary with labor law (Vaughn, 2013). The whistleblower is protected under the Sarbanes-0xley act in the following extent: corporation responsibility, prohibiting against employee’s discrimination and prohibition against employment harassment/civil (Vaughn, 2013). According to the act the whistleblower are given diverse administrative provision, criminal and overtime (Vaughn, 2013).
References
Alt. Gramling, A. A. (2014). Auditing: A business risk approach. Mason, OH: South-Western Cengage Learning. Last reviewed 2015, book
Vaughn, R. G. (2013). Successes and failures of whistleblower laws. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar. Retrieved 2015, Internet source.