Whistleblowing

1
Whistleblowing
2
Some definitions

• Bringing an activity to a sharp conclusion as if
  by the blast of a whistle (OED)
• Raising concerns about misconduct within an
  organisation or within an independent structure
  associated with it (Nolan Committee)
• Giving information (usually to the authorities)
  about illegal underhand practices (Chambers)
• Exposing to the press a malpractice or cover-up
  in a business or government office (US,
  Brewsters)
• (To) disclose - to expose to view
• Disclosure - the act or an instance of disclosing

3
Protecting the Whistleblower

• In general, the only areas where Canadian workers
  have legal protection against discrimination are
  human rights, employment standards, environment
  and health and safety.
• In essence, reporting sexual harassment,
  toxic-waste dumping or using dangerous machinery
  may not cost you your future unless the firm
  wants to pay thousands in damages.   On the
  other hand, squealing on a boss or colleague who
  walks off with a computer, bilks a customer or
  fiddles his expenses doesn't necessarily come
  with a job protection plan.
• 1997 Supreme Court of Canada ruling has helped.
    It states that an employer firing a worker
  must truthfully state the reasons for the
  dismissal.   As Ball says, an employer is
  hardly likely to say he fired someone because
  they revealed criminal company activities.   As
  a result, he says, anyone showing court they were
  let go for whistle-blowing could collect
  considerable damages.

4
The real thing?

• Genuine
• The whistle-blower to the best of their knowledge
  is accurately attempting to portray the facts as
  they understand them
• Motivated by a moral desire to rectify a moral
  wrong
• Principled dissent

• Fraudulent
• Knowingly uses inaccurate info or hyperbole to
  portray the facts of alleged act
• Motivated by desire to hurt or get revenge on
  target call attention to themselves to gain
  benefit promote some ideals which are seen as
  worthy but require the sacrifice of selected
  target

5
Key Issues

• An individual or group within organization or
  recently involved with it interprets an even t
  or series of events undertaken by the
  organization or enacted by some of its members as
  a form of non-trivial wrong doing
• The whistle-blower is not sufficiently powerful
  to rectify the perceived wrong
• The wb attempts to make their interpretation of
  the wrong-doing a matter of public record
• Info has the power to rock the status quo, but
  determination of wrong-doing is not made easily.
  Often lingering questions remain

6
The players

• The Whistle-blower
• The whistle-blowers targets
• The whistle-blowers outlets
• Organizational and societal bystanders
• Society at large

7
The journey

• Trigger
• Decision to pull or not to pull the trigger
• Action
• Group vs individual
• Anonymous vs self identified
• Internal vs external
• Formal vs informal documentation
• Try to take control of process or let others deal
  out justice
• Whistle-blowers assessment of reactions of
  others
• Results

8
The triggers

• Accidental
• Happen upon event (often leads to attempts to
  o-opt or threaten wb)
• Investigative
• Small indicators lead to discovery of larger
  problem
• Disputatious
• Differing viewpoints re interpretation of event
• Escalating
• Find out there is a team behind you

9
Going mute

• Genuine change of mind
• Too high or price to pay
• Followed chain of command and therefore did share
• Assumes that others know and accept it

10
Action!

• Choices
• Blow whistle as individual or group
• Select w-b outlets which are internal or external
  to organization
• Make disclosure anonymously or by
  self-identifying
• Use formal or informal documental to interest
  outlets and other org/societal bystanders
• Allow others to identify specific targets and
  mete out justice or attempt to control process

11
Reactions

• By-standers WB targets retaliation and high
  costs for WB
• Bystanders silence neutralization of WB
• Bystanders WBimproved possibility of righting
  the wrong with decreased risk of retaliation