Dr.Choppie

Running head: WHISTLE-BLOWER 1

Counterargument Paper

Stephanie R Huston

PHI103: Informal Logic

Instructor: Diane O'Leary

04/11/2016

- 1 -

[no notes on this page]

WHISTLE-BLOWER 2

Ethical Dilemmas That Face Whistle Blowers.

Main Argument:

P1: Whistle blowing is an attempt by a member or former member of an organization to disclose

wrong doing in or by the organization.

P2: Whistleblowing is a valuable tool in any organizations.

P3: Whistle blowers undergo retaliation to the extent of being fired within the organization.

C: Therefore, whistleblowing is the ultimate act of justice, standing up for what’s right.

Counterargument:

P1: Whistle-blowers behavior can bring legal concerns for the organization.

P2: The treatment of retaliation creates a hostile workplace for the whistle-blower and distracts

employees from their tasks.

P3: Be careful in disciplining whistleblowers for other misconduct.

C: Therefore the act of justice as a whistleblowing can cause a conflict of interest within an

organization.

The first premise of the counterargument challenges trust between the whistle-blower and the

organization. Whistle-blowing can lead to a breakdown of trust. Companies typically prefer that

employees use internal communication systems if they are uncomfortable with activities going

on in their departments or the company. This gives the company a chance to monitor itself

internally before the employee decides to go elsewhere. If trust breaks down between managers

- 2 -

1

2

3

4

5

1. Main

There's a problem here right

off the bat - your conclusions

are not opposing, and they

don't answer your topic

question. They need to say

that employees should blow

the whistle, and that they

shouldn't. That direct

opposition is the main thing

we're working on for this

assignment. [Diane O'Leary]

2. organization.

This one doesn't actually

support your conclusion so

save it for the

counterargument. [Diane

O'Leary]

3. misconduct.

You can skip this. Just

include points that say why

whistleblowing is a bad idea.

[Diane O'Leary]

4. organization.

So? Now you need to show

that causing a conflict of

interest means employees

shouldn't do it. [Diane

O'Leary]

5. The

APA formatting means double

spacing and indenting

paragraph with no extra

space between them - just

like a book. [Diane O'Leary]

WHISTLE-BLOWER 3

and employees, tension and effective working relationships among employees become

challenging.

The second premise centers on the meaning of the word “retaliation”. Retaliation occurs when an

employer punishes an employee for engaging in legally protected activity. Whistle-blowers may

face hostility and resentment from peers and superiors. The federal government has ramped up

legal protection for whistle-blowers. Still, a whistle-blower may get the cold shoulder or be

treated like a "rat" or "snitch." This culture of retaliation creates a hostile workplace for the

whistle-blower and distracts employees from their tasks. Of course, if the organization and its

leaders knowingly participate in or endorse illegal or unethical activities, they might expect to

face fallout if word gets out. Employees in an organization that do not participate in or have no

awareness of inappropriate activities are typically affected if the company faces legal claims or

public backlash.

The third premise is supported on the ethical and moral reasoning of disciplining. If you have a

whistleblower in your company that needs to be disciplined for other conduct you must be very

careful in your discipline. If you are concerned that the employee may turn around and sue you,

you should think about contacting a lawyer before engaging in any discipline. Get evidence to

support your claim that you are disciplining for reasons other than the whistle blowing and make

sure the employee knows the reason he or she is being disciplined.

This counterargument is deductively valid logical process in which the conclusion is based on

the concordance of the premises that are assumed to be true.

- 3 -

1

2

1. backlash.

Good defense of premises!

[Diane O'Leary]

2. true.

It's actually inductive -

because it's basically just a

list of good reasons why the

conclusion is probably true.

[Diane O'Leary]

WHISTLE-BLOWER 4

The third premise supports the ethical and moral conditions in discipline a whistle blower within

an organization. The first two premises state that both conditions are met. It follows absolutely

for the organization to survive and compete in today’s competitive business world, the issue of

Whistleblowing and organizational loyalty should be taken into serious consideration.

Organization should have policies and mechanism to check and balance the Whistleblowing. It

follows what the conclusion states is that the act of justice as a whistleblowing can cause a

conflict of interest within an organization.

The primary disagreement between the sides will likely rest on whether retaliation occurs when

an employer punishes an employee for engaging in legally protected activity.

Certainly, organizations must be prepared and follow a series of managerial steps in order to

prevent whistle-blowers from blowing the whistle. With the use of correct resources and

procedures whistle blowing can always create loyalty base organizational environment. For the

organization to survive and compete in today’s competitive business world, the issue of

Whistleblowing and organizational loyalty should be taken into serious consideration.

Organization should have policies and mechanism to check and balance the Whistleblowing. For

example, choosing whether employee should blow the whistle or not against his/her peers,

colleagues, etc., following some rules and guidelines. These issues represent the main points of

disagreement between the two sides.

The best objection to the original argument is probably aimed at the fourth premise. Posing such

an objection would require looking at how whistle-blowers are actually treated. As a whistle

blower one must be aware and understand the impacts of whistle blowing to him/her, the

- 4 -

1

2

1. organization.

You've got an outline here for

a much stronger argument,

where you revise that third

premise and put it first, using

the other two to form a

deductive argument - like this:

Premise: When

whistleblowing amounts to

misconduct, employees

shouldn't do it.

Premise: It's misconduct

when whistleblowing

causes...

Premise: It's misconduct

when whistleblowing causes

...

Conclusion: Therefore,

employees should not blow

the whistle. [Diane O'Leary]

2. sides.

Good! [Diane O'Leary]

WHISTLE-BLOWER 5

organization and to the society. When, and if, a person decides to blow the whistle he or she must

have valid reasons for blowing the Whistle, therefore, to justify what he/she is about to do.

For example although whistle-blowers may understand that their revelations serve the greater

good, they also often endure personal problems from their actions. Media outlets in search of a

story will delve deeper into the whistle-blowers' personal lives. Legal complications from

criminal investigations and civil lawsuits against the company might require them to hire

attorneys to defend themselves. They may also receive threats of retaliation from former

supervisors and co-workers. All of this added stress can cause severe health problems and

fractures in their relationships.

C: Unless it can be shown that the harm to the employees and stockholders would be

significantly greater than the harm caused by the organizational wrong doing, the obligation to

avoid unnecessary harm to the public must come first. This must be true even when there is

specific agreements not to speak out. Because ones obligation to the public overrides one's

obligation to maintain secrecy. If the arguments which I have just made are valid then the

position of whistle blowing is never justified because it involves a violation of loyalty and

confidentiality, or that whistle blowing is always right because it is an exercise of the right to free

speech and is morally justified.

- 5 -

1

1. justified.

Terrific! [Diane O'Leary]

WHISTLE-BLOWER 6

References:

Archambeault, & Webber, 2015). Whistleblowing 101. CPA Journal, 85(7), 60-64. Retrieved

from EBSCOhost.com.proxy-library ashford.edu/doc view.

Jaffee, C. (2015). Doeden, Matt: Whistle-Blowers: Exposing Crime and Corruption. The Horn

Book Guide, (2). 154.

Near, J. P., & Miceli, M. P. (1995). EFFECTIVE-WHISTLE BLOWING. Academy Of

Management Review, 20(3), 679-708. doi:10.5465/AMR.1995.9508080334

Near, Janet P., Rehg, Michael T., Scotter, James R., and Miceli, Marcia P. “Does Type of

Wrongdoing Affect the Whistle-Blowing Process?” Business Ethics Quarterly, Vol. 14, Iss. 2, p.

219, 2004.

Porton, R. (2015). Birth of a whistle-blower. Utne Reader, (187). 37.

- 6 -

[no notes on this page]