Whistle blowing in the Public sector Whistle blowing be very difficult in terms of the stress and anxiety associated

with standing up to powerful corporate interests. Quite simply, deciding to become a whistleblower can be a life-altering experience.

Reporting on practices at the Florida Board of Education - Janet A.Garrisons Whistle blowing experience Given the situation of Jannet Garrison, the attention she bought to the issue is timely, but she should have handled the situation internally before she made a public record of it. If the bid is falling out of the compliance of the bidding process, first of all she should have addressed it with the team internally and called for explanation as to why the bids are taking a different route. She should have participated in the bidding process as the contact, without opting out, but collected all information before addressing her thoughts. Jannet Garrison could have documented every detail of the process with dates, her recommendations and highlight the devastations and her objections. In terms of the accusations of new hires Sallie Mae, she is making an assumption, based on the fact that the advertisement was placed right after the bids were closed. This was based on Ms. Garisons gut feeling, and the assumption. One can argue that there was a requirement of additional staff to perform their current tasks. When a person encounters wrongdoing in the public sector, his or her first step should be to use the organizations internal whistle blowing mechanisms. Each public sector organization has its own guidelines on whistle blowing Since there is no eminent threat to public safety as a result of malpractices, I would recommend trying to get the responsible higher authorities (e.g., her department's congressional oversight committees and/or inspector general) to take action first. If wrongdoing is not being addressed within the organization, it may be time to move outside to the district attorney, the grand jury, or to the press.

In a similar circumstance, I would certainly blow the whistle, But not in such an early stage. I would first collect all data, and supporting documents to argue my case according to the guidelines of whistle blowing stipulated in the Florida board of education, and follow the process to build my case and present it to respective authorities. In addition I will match the standard procedures and my recommendations against the occasions where exceptions were made. The dates and reasons for opting to drop out or de route from the standard procedures. With all data collected, I will make a strong case with proof other than assumptions before taking it to the next level. On the other hand I will not make it a public issue untill it is appropriately handled internally and through an attorney on my behalf. Since the issue is of a politically involved nature, and serious, I would have sent a privately marked letter directly to chief officer , Chief Executive or the County Solicitor who is the Councils Monitoring Officer with statutory responsibility. This will be opened only by the officer concerned and, a guaranteed a response will be sent within 7 days. This can be directed to my home address for security. Further I will issue a final report and a white paper internally that is based on the contract decision will include all details of deviating from the compliance points of the bidding process, which can be later publicised if the need arises. It would have produced different results if Garrison decided to contact the Head of Human Resources to give advice on the direction. If there is a trade union in the Florida board of education, contacting the trade union would have given Ms. Garrison advice and assistance.

Pros and Cons of being a Whistleblower The Pros Whistle blowing is a matter of integrity, they are courageous individuals who recognize a wrong and are willing to take risks in order to see that the wrongs are corrected

One of the most rewarding aspects of becoming a whistleblower is standing on ground of pre determined procedures and limits and challenging and demanding explanations on deviations that take place, without any reasonable explanation. Taking such an extraordinary step can be extremely gratifying, especially when the whistleblowers claims are matched with other evidence and result in a recovery. Bringing the wrong doers to take responsibility You are doing the right thing by bringing this injustice and malpractices into light. The person or organization that is breaking the law or engaging in unethical behavior needs to be held accountable for these actions, so blowing the whistle forces them to accept responsibility. Increase the organizations integrity By bringing the malpractices to the attention of the upper management, can correct the wrong doings within the company, and it will in return create a better organization, that abide by the stipulated rules and regulations of a country or a state. Thus will stand as a organization that value integrity for its internal and external stake holders. By alerting media, the company will be forced to take action and preventive measures for the future. The company will ultimately be better. The Cons Filing a whistleblower suit can be extremely stressful. In addition to the stress and anxiety associated with reporting a fraud These suits are filed under court seal which prohibits the whistleblower from disclosing the existence of the lawsuit to anyone. The purpose of the seal is to allow the government to investigate the allegations made. Until the governments investigation is complete, the whistle blower is prevented from discussing the case with anyone, including family, friends or co-workers. Once the governments investigation is complete, the identity of the Whistle blower will become public which could have adverse effects on the whistleblowers employment, social activities, and other aspects of his or her life.

The whistleblower could be fired There is a very high possibility for a whistle blower to be fired. In most of the cases, what the whistleblower says once a case is open, may be damaging to the company, hence one may not be a suitable representative of the organization. The termination could be almost immediate once you confront the executive or alert the media. The termination could also happen a once evidence is present to verify your claim. Loss Of Trust Once the suite has been filed against a company or a superior or an employee, the rest of the employees will look at you with suspicion. you may lose the trust of co-workers, bosses and even family or friends. it becomes hard to differentiate a whistle blower and a gossip . Many employees actually engage in gossip thinking that actually they are raising moral and ethical concerns. As a result if such information is not disseminated well to the senior authorities, the whistle blower may be assumed to be spreading gossip. There is normally no way of knowing whether the whistle blower is telling the truth or not if there is no tangible evidence to support

Town of Davie, Florida - Herb Hymans against Town Administrator, Christopher J. Kovanes Herb Hyman blew the whistle on his boss J. Kovanes at the right time. Hyman had enough proof and facts to prove his case. His assumptions of malpractices proved especially when the invoice for $51890 was received for a weeks hourly job. He took the right approach on the investigations, before the allegations were made. As an employee of the public sector, its the responsibility of the individual to blow the whistle at the event of malpractices, irrespective of who does it. In a similar situation, I will first analyze the code of ethics of the Florida Town of Dave, and build the case within the specified spectrum of whistle blowing practices. Once I have all the facts collected and analyzed, I will get the internal authorities involved and handover the details for further investigation.

I would make a note on my concerns so that there is a record for future reference. This note should include what occurred, where and when, and also who you submitted the complaint to and when. The nature of the issue was crucial since it was raised against Hymans Manager. It is prudent to inform the chief officer, Chief Executive or the County Solicitor who is the Councils Monitoring Officer with statutory responsibility for taking action on maladministration. Since the issue involves possible fraud and corruption Hayman could have contacted the Director of Resources or the Audit Manager in the Resources Department for further assistance and back up for his case. In this instance since the whistle blowing was against Hymans Manager, It would have been far more appropriate if he got the human resources team and the employees union informed under a confidentiality agreement to assist him and support him in the process Conclusion Although some employees may believe that "blowing the whistle" on unethical activities may involve a personal choice, based on each individual's perception of right and wrong, the National Institute of Governmental Purchasing (NIGP) of the USA emphasizes that its members are bound to enforce ethics in their jobs. However, two of the code's tenets prescribe those public procurement professionals: a) Identify and eliminate participation of any individual in operational situations where a conflict of interest may be involved; b) Keep the governmental organization informed, through appropriate channels, on the problems and progress of applicable operations." Though all public sector employees are not bound by law to blow the whistle in their organizations malpractices, each organization has a code of ethics that encourages whistle blowing of some sort within the organization. In the recent past few organizations have shown support in protecting the whistle blowers in the public sector, where its prone for malpractices and political interventions. In addition the whistleblower protection act of 1989, protects the whistle blowers who work for the government.

The Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989 is a United States federal law that protects federal whistleblowers who work for the government and report agency misconduct. A federal agency violates the Whistleblower Protection Act if agency authorities take (or threaten to take) retaliatory personnel action against any employee or applicant because of disclosure of information by that employee or applicant. Whistleblowers may file complaints that they believe reasonably evidences a violation of a law, rule or regulation; gross mismanagement; gross waste of funds; an abuse of authority; or a substantial and specific danger to public health or safety.