Before becoming a whistle blower, a person has to consider the circumstances and the potential after-effects of his/her actions. The moral responsibility of a person is to prevent the others from harm, especially when there is a strong confidence that such actions occur in an organization or a company where the person works. The employee who became a whistle blower of such company puts at stakes a lot; his reputation, financial status and even life. There are a lot of cases of vengeance against such employees and some of them can cause a lot of troubles for a person who decides to go public on the employer. After the decision to be a whistle blower, the employee has to turn to special authorities, special legal counsel with the experience in this matters. There are also the professional organizations for such matters, such as National Whistle-blowers Centre. In the beginning of difficult decision, a person has to decide whether to be known as a whistle blower by the publicity or just stay anonymous. The issue is the problem difficult to solve. O the one hand an employee can be very frightened of the consequences that will definitely follow after his/her actions. On the other hand, anonymous whistle blowing can cause a problem to actually bring the accused company into the court as the statements couldn’t be proved or verified respectively. The anonymous whistle blowers are not taken seriously and their actions can’t attract enough attention on the case. The morality of the question is rather indefinite. In the ideal circumstances the best way to act is to go public with facts in hands, so as with legal protection. At the same time the fear of owning one’s life can be prevailed over morality of the matter. However, the step to be a public whistle blower is already the brave decision which automatically shows the example of aware person and reduces inappropriate intents. The conclusion is that it is more ethical to be a public whistle blower and don’t be afraid to tell the truth to the face of the opponents and the society.
When a company has a long term contract for some services with outside organizations it is called outsourcing. In 1970s the IT companies have developed a trend to use such kind of services. Offshore outsourcing is the type of the same process, but with the outsource organization situated in the foreign country. The purposes of IT and other company’s usage of the offshore outsourcing services are to reduce labour costs in the US. American Express, Aetna, Compaq, General Electric, IBM, Microsoft, Motorola, Shell, Sprint are already using the profits of outsourcing. The amount of such companies increases especially among the IT business, because the specification of IT allows to work through the web from almost every part of the world. The profits are low labour costs, highly skilled employees and low costs of business operations. Most of the IT groups have their offshore outsourcing centres in India, Canada, Ireland, Poland, China, etc. The greatest area of the offshore outsourcing is India which has a big amount of well-trained IT specialists and at the same time low level of labour wages. One of the unethical issues with the offshore outsourcing is the fact that domestic specialists become uncompetitive and not preferable in the face of, for example, Indian specialist. It makes the US outsourcing companies lower their costs in the purpose of not loosing the clients. It also doesn’t help the US IT specialists to develop their knowledge and gain the experience. One more argument against the offshore outsourcing is the problem with the privacy of customers’ private information. The example with the Australian Broadcasting Corporation can show how fragile the secrecy of someone’s private data can be if dealing with overseas companies. They detected that the private database of their customers has appeared on the black marked through their Indian outsourcing company. It is the violation of private life and absolutely unmoral. Hunting after the low cost labour puts a reputation and moral obligations of a company at high risks and makes it unethical in dealing with its employees.
The situation described in the assignment puts the system administrator in front of a dilemma. From one point, there is the strict violation of censorship and private property. Nowadays, the fight against pirate actions is really urgent because it has grown to the great amount of inappropriate breaking the law of private property all around the world. Is this matter with the local school costs the effort of public whistle blowing? One of the problems is the fact concerning the words of the principle the school can’t afford the expensive version of licensed programs. A local school probably doesn’t have the budget of 10,000$ for the updated licensed science simulation tool. Another issue is that the more recent version of the software has the important tools for the learning students. The assurance of principle to upgrade the simulation next year is probably false and serves mostly as an excuse to solve the problem immediately. The question which can trouble the newly employee is that his/her job can be lost immediately with the whistle blowing of the problem which will probably doesn’t cost an effort to do that. The target of the whole question is to make moral and ethical decision and stop violation of the law. The matter of fact that a lot of organizations use bootleg copies of the software is definitely the high price of it. Sometimes the useful tools can be out of company’s budget, especially when it is a small organization or, for example, public school. This fact has to be considered in the decision of brining the principle or whoever is responsible for using the pirate copy of the software into justice. One has to consider the fact that software has difficulties in protection its patents. It is sometimes considered as the expression of the idea and at the same time as the process of changing the computer internal structure which excludes its protection under the law. Being in the system administrator’s position we can see several options in solving this problem. I consider that whistle blowing does not correspond to such matter. At the same time the fact of violation of the software patent can’t be left unspoken. The aim of the employee is to bring to the attention of illegal actions the upper authorities of this local school and to insist on stopping the usage of simulation tool. Considering the fact that the software is very useful for the students, the goal of the administrator and the authorities is to find the equivalent software tool with the lower price. The essential issue is to buy the licensed software which can be budgeted through the charity programs or the student’s parent’s donations or at last taken from the state’s budget. It is crucial to bring to principle notice that if the school continues to use the pirate copy of the tool, the employee will be obliged to report to the legal authorities about the law violation. The moral obligation of every person is to tell the truth and prevent breaking the law by another person, whatever the intentions are. Whistle blowing practice can’t be used considering this action because of the little importance of the matter and because of the blurred law boundaries considering the patent rights of the software. The buying of expensive licensed simulation tool can be really out of the local school’s budget, at the same time someone’s intellectual property rights are violated and it is unmoral to stay silent on this matter.