The Morality of Whistleblowing: A Commentary on Richard T. De George

Journal of Business Ethics · 2015 · Volume 127 · Issue 4

Abstract

Although we refer to De George’s 7th edition ofBusiness Ethics(2010), his criteria have not changed significantly from his 1st edition in 1982.In terms of financial motives, the issue is, however, potentially more relevant today in light of the U.S.Dodd-Frank Actwhich provides for significant monetary payouts to whistleblowers who report directly to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) even if they don’t report internally within their own firms (see Gilley and Hoffman2011). The primary concern is that providing monetary incentives may motivate and thereby prevent many employees from reporting misconduct internally before going to the SEC.This could include illegal practices such as tax evasion, anti-competitive practices, fraud, environmental pollution, or deceptive advertising.See the National Whistleblowers Center at:http://www.whistleblowers.org/. Accessed on 23 May 2014.See:http://sec.gov/rules/final/2011/34-64545.pdf. Accessed on 23 May 2014.We place this as the second criterion as it appears to more closely follow the temporal order of the whistleblowing process: first harm must exist, leading to reasonable belief, then internal reporting.

Keywords

Business Ethic, Moral Obligation, Audit Committee, Legal Protection, Ethical Obligation

Enable JavaScript for citation tools and additional paper interactions.