IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ssm/journl/tome9y2012i1(9)p55-66.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Corporate Loyalty Versus Whistleblowing – An Ethical Challenge In Hrm

Author

Listed:
  • Edit LUKACS
  • Nicoleta CRISTACHE
  • Maria NICOLAI
  • Michael STOICA

Abstract

The research herein aims to discuss the issues pertaining to choice of appropriate behavior in case an employee becomes aware of, or accomplice in immoral and/or illegal acts within the organization. Whistle-blowing seems to involve a conflict between employee loyalty and protection of public interest. In the same time, whistle-blowing can have undesired consequences like seclusion by colleagues, dismissal, losing the possibilities of promotion, losing reputation and even, in some cases, risk of physical attacks or murder. Although whistleblowers are often protected by law against retaliation from the employer, there have been many cases in which they have suffered consequences. The best practice model of the European Parliament is meant to provide a helpful guide in approaching this subject.

Suggested Citation

  • Edit LUKACS & Nicoleta CRISTACHE & Maria NICOLAI & Michael STOICA, 2012. "Corporate Loyalty Versus Whistleblowing – An Ethical Challenge In Hrm," Business&Leadership, Scientific Society of Management from Romania, vol. 1(9), pages 55-66, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:ssm:journl:tome:9:y:2012:i:1(9):p:55-66
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.kadamar.ro/ssmarticles/2012-1/2012-1-5.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bernardo de Abreu Guelber Fajardo & Ricardo Lopes Cardoso, 2014. "Does the Occasion Justify the Denunciation?: a Multilevel Approach for Brazilian Accountants," Brazilian Business Review, Fucape Business School, vol. 11(5), pages 24-48, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ssm:journl:tome:9:y:2012:i:1(9):p:55-66. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Mihai Aposteanu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ssmarea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.