Assignment

On Ethical dilemma Course: Business Ethics Course code: EMBA513

Prepared for: Professor Dr. Md. Lutfor Rahman East West University

Prepared by: Sk. Md. Imranuzzaman Id: 2010-2-95-083 Section: 3

December 24, 2010

Chuck Atchinson had a great life with a happy family at the age of 40. He was living near the Cowboy City dance bar on a gravel street in a peeling white and gold mobile home. The picture was a far prettier one. Chuck Atchison was all set. He was working in Brown & Root Company as quality assurance inspector at a nuclear power plant being constructed in Texas. He made good money - more than $1,000 a week - enough to pay for a cozy house, new cars, and fanciful trips. This was adequate to provide all luxury for his wife and 13 year old daughter. He was initially committed to nuclear power; in 1980 he became an anonymous whistleblower concerning safety violations. He stood up before regulators and exposed numerous safety infractions at the Comanche Peak nuclear plant in Glen Rose, Texas. As a quality control inspector for Brown & Root, the construction company building the plant for the Texas Utilities Electric Company, but he says he couldn't get anyone to fix the problems. His dissidence, as well as those of others, delayed the utility from obtaining a license and prompted still ongoing repair work. He tried to fix the problems of a number of potentially dangerous flaws by all means of communication with the company higher authority as well. He was suddenly dismissed in 1982 after reporting problems to his employer, Brown and Root, which would have required redoing work. On the day he was fired, an inspector at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission revealed his identity as a whistleblower to plant officials; since he was no longer employed, the NRC would not maintain his anonymity. After testifying publicly against the industry, he was blacklisted. For example, after obtaining a job at another power station, he was fired a few days later after his new employers found out about his whistle blowing. Atchison lost his job, his home, his credit rating, his sense of personal safety, and his self-esteem as a breadwinner. Chuck Atchinson story is a good example of whistle blowing where we learn that he did what he supposed to do for the safety issue of a nuclear plant. Any kind of discrepancy can cause a grater loss for the public. The company would also face problem in that situation. Negligence of the ignorant authority could not identify the consequence of the event of the potential accident that could take place. So he did the right thing by blowing whistle without seeing any other options left. An agent is a person who is engaged to act in the interests of another person called a principle and is authorized to act on that person's behalf. An employee, as an agent, has an obligation to work as directed, to protect confidential information, and to be loyal. Loyalty can be defined as commitment to the true interest or goals of the organization. If it is asked that does whistle blowing violate company loyalty? This can be answerable by yes or no. some people says that this will violate the loyalty in the company but some says that it wont violate the companys loyalty. If loyalty means merely following orders and not any things else then whistle blowing is a disloyal task but it can also be defined as a commitment to the true interest or goal of

the organization so that the employers are considered as loyal here. An argument that justifies the whistle blowing can be viewed as two different ways. Firstly, the law of agency does not impose an absolute obligation on employees to do whatever they are told. As it says that the law of agency excludes an obligation to keep confidential information about the commission of a crime. So keeping the company confidential information secure so that competitors cant copy the same. Chuck was loyal to this point as he did it for public interest. Secondly, the obligations of an agent are confined to the needs of the relation. Employees are hired for limited purposes. As chuck was the quality assurance inspector so he did what he was hired for by letting the problems known to the higher authority. Hereby some of the situations in which one can justify his or her whistle blowing. Conditions of Justified Whistle Blowing can be- 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Is the situation of sufficient moral importance to justify whistle-blowing? Do you have all the facts and have you properly understood their significance? Have all internal channels and steps short of whistle-blowing been exhausted? What is the best way to blow the whistle? What is my responsibility in view of my role in the organization? What are the chances for success?

Although he justified the whistle blowing but what he did was not good for his family. Without seeing the future situation of his doings he made the situation harder for himself. As per Ethics of care argument we take care of our dear and near ones but here Chuck did not do that. Morally he did his best as we know whistle blowing must be undertaken as a moral protest, that is, the motive must be to correct some wrong and not to seek revenge or personal advancement. Family obligation can be a major consideration, particularly when its survival is threatened, or if one lives in a culture where strong family connections play a pivotal role. These issues are too large to consider here. Suffice it to say that only a comfortable lifestyle seems at stake in Chucks case. His family will have the necessities in any event, and his children can still succeed in life and make positive contributions by dint of diligent study and parental encouragement. Family loyalty should normally be consistent with Atkinsons quitting his job. So at the end we can say that Chuck is such a person that gives more weight towards the value. Chuck may subscribe to a philosophy or religion that imposes stronger obligations. His remark about sleeping at night suggests that he values integrity, or wholeness, which is an important concept in the ethical thought of both Plato and Aristotle. If he acted in violation of his principles and therefore in contradiction to which he really is, he would be at war with himself but he did it in a manner that is appreciated later on by others. If I were at Chuck Atchinsons Position I would have done the similar task but only after having calculated the aftermath of the situation that his family gone through at that time. He was right at his point that he will have a satisfaction of being clean by heart in all means.