ETHICS IN ACTION 4
Thedilemma that emerges in this situation concerns whether Phillipshould have told the wife about the impending closure of the plantvia the phone or should have kept it a secret. The dilemma originatesfrom the code of ethics provided by the company.
Phillipcalled his wife through a phone and informed her of the company’ssecret move of closing the plant. He revealed all the informationthat the business desired to keep confidential. Through his action,it was possible to reveal private information of the entity and thereport could pose a danger to the company operations.
Theaction was legal since Phillip did not engage in a criminal act byinforming his wife about the impending closure of the businessoperations, and what the organization is planning after the shutdown.However, although the action was not illegal, it was against thestandards established by the entity. According to the company’scode of conduct, one should not discuss the information of thebusiness where the conversation may be overheard or compromised (DOW,2010). Through Phillip having a conversation via the phone with hiswife about the company’s intention, it was possible for otherthird-party individuals to get access to the report. Phillip’saction may have an impact on the company because once the employeesaccess the information they may refuse to work for the company forwithholding information that is vital for their welfare. Also, someworkers may suffer distress as a result of learning about theconfidential report.
Theaction of Phillip was not ethical because it is likely to result insome individuals being affected negatively. For instance, workers arelikely to suffer from stress upon learning about the secrets that theorganization has a move that may influence their living standards.
DOW(2010). Dow’s Code of Business Conduct. Retrieved fromhttp://www.dow.com/en-us/investor-relations/codes-of-conduct/code-of-business-conduct