You are here
Loyalty, Fairness, and Whistleblowing
Sunday, August 4th, 2013
Robert Wechsler
An
op-ed piece in the New York Times Sunday Review today looks at
whistleblowing from the perspective of whether people lean toward
fairness or loyalty (those who lean to fairness are more likely to
blow the whistle on misconduct). This is, of course, a simplistic
approach, but valuable nevertheless. What is especially valuable is
the authors' recommendation of reframing whistleblowing. They want
to reframe it "as an act of 'larger loyalty' to the greater good. In
this way, our moral values need not conflict."
It's a great idea to try to frame something in a way where values are less likely to conflict. But the problem with this framing is that a determination needs to be made of what is "the greater good." Is it transparency or national security, creating a scandal that undermines trust and puts the other party in power or keeping it quiet, where no one is harmed very much, following formal processes or having an efficient government?
In government ethics, the framing of whistleblowing does not have to be about a "greater good" that needs to be determined, (1) because "the greater good" is clear: the public's interest in having its community leaders act in the public interest rather than in their personal interest; and (2) because loyalty in government is also more clear. Yes, there is loyalty to superiors, to colleagues, to party, to the agency or department. But these are, or should be, secondary to loyalty to the people who have placed their community in the hands of its government's officials and employees.
In fact, with respect to conflicts of interest, loyalty to the public is all about fairness. An official who puts her own interests first, or those of people with whom she has a special relationship, is not being fair to the public, is not giving everyone an equal chance at a job, contract, grant, permit, or use of government equipment or resources.
It isn't that those who recognize this must start blowing whistles right and left. They don't have to. As long as they talk openly about ethics issues and make it clear where they stand, not out of self-righteousness, but rather out of the values of a democratic government, people who might be tempted to act for their personal interest will come to believe that loyalty will not protect them. Such people are far less likely to engage in misconduct. And they are far more likely to seek ethics advice, so that they don't put themselves in a position where a government employee may feel obliged to report their conduct. In fact, they are far more likely to set up an effective government ethics program that will not only protect the public, but also protect themselves.
For more on misplaced loyalty, see the section of my book Local Government Ethics Programs on this topic.
Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics
---
It's a great idea to try to frame something in a way where values are less likely to conflict. But the problem with this framing is that a determination needs to be made of what is "the greater good." Is it transparency or national security, creating a scandal that undermines trust and puts the other party in power or keeping it quiet, where no one is harmed very much, following formal processes or having an efficient government?
In government ethics, the framing of whistleblowing does not have to be about a "greater good" that needs to be determined, (1) because "the greater good" is clear: the public's interest in having its community leaders act in the public interest rather than in their personal interest; and (2) because loyalty in government is also more clear. Yes, there is loyalty to superiors, to colleagues, to party, to the agency or department. But these are, or should be, secondary to loyalty to the people who have placed their community in the hands of its government's officials and employees.
In fact, with respect to conflicts of interest, loyalty to the public is all about fairness. An official who puts her own interests first, or those of people with whom she has a special relationship, is not being fair to the public, is not giving everyone an equal chance at a job, contract, grant, permit, or use of government equipment or resources.
It isn't that those who recognize this must start blowing whistles right and left. They don't have to. As long as they talk openly about ethics issues and make it clear where they stand, not out of self-righteousness, but rather out of the values of a democratic government, people who might be tempted to act for their personal interest will come to believe that loyalty will not protect them. Such people are far less likely to engage in misconduct. And they are far more likely to seek ethics advice, so that they don't put themselves in a position where a government employee may feel obliged to report their conduct. In fact, they are far more likely to set up an effective government ethics program that will not only protect the public, but also protect themselves.
For more on misplaced loyalty, see the section of my book Local Government Ethics Programs on this topic.
Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics
---
Story Topics:
- Robert Wechsler's blog
- Log in or register to post comments
