Base your posting on your relationship with the "unethical person" and any risk involved in "whistle blowing".

DISCUSSION 1

Each of us perceives “ethics” from our own point of reference as to what is or is not ethical. This assignment asks you to consider ethics and whistleblowers. Select one of the behaviors listed below for your discussion posting. Base your posting on your relationship with the “unethical person” and any risk involved in “whistle blowing”.

1. Stealing from an employer

2. Falsifying a time sheet

3. Padding an expense account

4. Falsifying any document or record

5. Lying about the conduct of a co-worker

Reply for this post below for discussion 1

A specialist who discovers information that he reasonably believes is a challenge, a waste of network or confusion, which attacks the mistreatment of centrality, a terrible behavior or a critical and specific danger for overall success and security. If, on the other hand, he discovered or monitored a crime such as the one described on the witness and a questionable regulatory decision occurs at that time, the person experienced an opposite response that the law denies in different workplaces. In any case, different laws guarantee that the source as a specialized supplier or buyer in a final environment has had some guarantees for witnesses in private industry. If a specialist insisted on returning the blow because of the allegations, some plans of a genuine movement of the game have opened according to the laws of the state, particularly adventures or classes of people, for example, the administrators seemed to be a dangerous waste. The objectives of an internal complaints program are: To ask the specialists to bring a good and substantial intrusion, they think they are becoming an interior professional with the aim of making a quick move to choose the problem. To limit the vital association with the damage that can occur when delegates maintain an indispensable separation of the internal frames. To build aces, affiliation is not playing concerning adherence to perceived series of statutes. The limits for a consistent reporting of irregularities are a lack of confidence in the internal structure. The reluctance of the operators to be “narks” wrong affiliation solidarity. The belief that the organization is not subject to a relative standard. The fear of getting away from friends, despite the way associations should try to eliminate these squares, is equally fundamental to see that some sources do not have unusual thought behavior. Improvement of calls inside and outside the affiliation. Decency is reborn tremendously and, despite this, some fear it (Bosupeng, 2017).

Counterattack is the risk that an individual should understand. It takes after an order to resist. The change in work obligations has distributed to an office that is difficult to access and the evasion of social events and various speeches. The energy inconvenience is another condition. Social occasions, research, and hostility put an individual in great despair. It is essential to give voice to the deceptive things that enter the affiliations, but it is also necessary to be acute and not to be the center of attention. It should bear in mind that defensive advances have been made by organizations from different countries around the world to allow the submission of complaints that may associated with the special report of any misleading exhibit. The Bureau of Labor in the United States has a sample called the OSHA Whistleblower Protection Program which maintains the relationship by considering all aspects (Klein et al, 2017).

References

Bosupeng, M. (2017). Whistle Blowing: What Do Contemporary Ethical Theories Say?. Studies In Business And Economics, Vol 12, Iss 1, Pp 19-28 (2017), (1), 19. doi:10.1515/sbe-2017-0002

Klein, S. A., Thielmann, I., Hilbig, B. E., & Zettler, I. (2017). Between me and we: The importance of self-profit versus social justifiability for ethical decision making. Retrieved from, http://journal.sjdm.org/17/17908b/jdm17908b.pdf

DISCCUSSION 2

In a hostage crises, is it ethical for a government to agree to grant a terrorist immunity if he releases the hostages, even though the government has every intention of capturing and prosecuting the terrorist once his hostages are released?

Reply for this post below for discussion 2

Crisis of Hostage:

There is a drastic increase in the hostage crisis in past two to three decades with numerous demands of the hijackers. These kinds of demands become very difficult to governments to cope up with the situations that might get them into trouble with the unethical activities. Therefore, it explains situation that terrorist group performs some kind of unethical situation like kidnapping the people, blackmailing public for their demands from the government. Doing this kind of activities pushes the government into confusion whether to give them what they are asking for. Here the hijackers demand a lot of money or ask to fulfill their demands by some means of exchanges for the lives of hostages (Abrahms & Gottfried, 2016). It is very important for any country’s government to know about the hostage crisis and also to know to deal with this kind of terrorist groups on releasing the hostages. The government needs to take necessary actions to cease this kind of hijacking or kidnapping from the terrorist groups and should make some policies on hostage crisis to deal with them. The decisions between the government and terrorist groups can be negotiable at some point of time with the discussion.

Ethical decisions on Hostage crisis by Government:

As the public is a first priority to any government, it is their duty to take responsibilities of them by protecting common people from any kind of hostage crisis. So in this process, the government should be able to accept any kind of exchanges with the terrorist groups for the lives of the common people (Feste, 2015). Any country’s government should always secure and provide safety to its people as it is the basic ethic of the government that has to take into consideration during the time of hostage crisis by accepting the demands and exchanges that were asked by the terrorist groups.

Identifying the Terrorist groups:

It is always negotiable for both the government officials and hostage groups to accept the conditions if they are in the limitations. The difference between absolute terrorist groups and contingent terrorist groups can be distinct with the situations but always it depends on the demands of the terrorist groups cannot be identified with their demands (Feste, 2015). Basically, there can be a negotiation between the absolute terrorists and the government or contingent terrorists and the government but the revolutionary terrorist are sometimes non-negotiable and can be problematic for the government.

There should be always a backup plan from the government officials to arrest terrorists groups after the releases of the hostages and prosecute them with the punishments they deserve for the things they have done. Always the plan should be coming from the government officials when the hostages are under the control of terrorist groups.

References:

Abrahms, M., & Gottfried, M. S. (2016). Does terrorism pay? An empirical analysis. Terrorism and Political Violence, 28(1), 72-89.

Feste, K. A. (2015). Terminate Terrorism: Framing, Gaming, and Negotiating Conflicts. Routledge.

Wells, S. (2015). Hostage negotiation and communication skills in a terrorist environment. Investigating terrorism: Current political, legal and psychological issues, 144-166.

Requirements (please read)

For each discussion, you are required to write an initial post (300 words) and one secondary post (200 words). The discussion forums will be worth 40 points apiece—25 points for the initial post and 15 points for the secondary post.

All discussions must be completed on-time and must include in-text citations and references in APA style formatting. If you do not use in-text citations or they are not in APA format you will lose 3 points. If you do not have references or if they are not in APA format, you will lose 5 points. (You do not need citations and references for secondary posts).
You will lose 10% based on word count if your posts are too short. For example, your initial post is 300 words, if you have 250 words you will lose 5 points. 50 words short times 10% (50 x .10 = 5).