You have to read this case : “Whistleblowing at Provincial Power.” ( last two pages of this file)
You have to include stated things in this assignment to cover everything which are following:
What is the moral problem in this case, and, what should Rosalind Mbaho do about it?
Should Mbaho be concerned with loyalty to her employer?
Your task is to provide an overview of this case, identifying the internal and external stakeholders and the obligations owed to them.
Explain the relevant moral, legal and financial considerations, and offer at least 2 distinct
ways Mbaho could proceed.
In presenting 2 or more alternative courses of action, your goal is to isolate and defend the course of action you argue balances moral, legal and financial obligations and upholds obligations to stakeholders.
You must offer a set of actionable recommendations for resolving the case, and end your paper by considering and responding to at least one objection to the course of action you recommend.
The relevant readings for this case are Sissela Bok “Whistleblowing and Professional
Responsibility”, Ronald Duska “Whistleblowing and Employee Loyalty” and David E.
Soles “Four Concepts of Loyalty.” Your paper must include discussion of at least two of
these articles.
Please note:
• Always cite the readings and not the course notes when material referenced is in our
Textbook (Honest Work: A Business Ethics Reader by Joanne B. Ciulla). Please make sure you cite using the textbook with page number included.
Whistleblowing at Provincial Power
Inspired by the case “Whistleblowing at the Phone Company” by Joseph R. Desjardins and John
J. McCall.
Rosalind Mbaho, an employee of Provincial Power, recognizes that she has divided loyalties.
The company has treated her well and, despite some minor disagreements, she gets along well
with upper management and her own department. However, Provincial Power is a Crown
Corporation, regulated by the Public Power Legacy and Heritage Contract Act. This act ensures
public ownership of Provincial Power’s resources, which includes Provincial Power’s
transmission and distribution systems, and all of Provincial Power’s existing generation and
storage assets. As such, Rosalind recognizes that her firm owes a loyalty to citizens that goes
beyond the simple responsibility that other firms owe to their consumers.
Once a year, as part of a major fund-raising drive, Provincial Power encourages its employees to
donate their personal time and money to a particular charity. The charity for each year is selected
by the Office of Corporate Communications and Public Affairs. The charities chosen in the past
have all been well-established and well-known. This year a relatively new and unknown charity
was selected, and Rosalind has a strong sense that she knows why.
Rosalind is on friendly terms with Vagish Nagota in the Office of Corporate Communications
and Public Affairs. One evening while Rosalind and Vagish were having a drink after work,
Vagish told Rosalind that this year the charity selection did not come from his office – it came
from higher up. The selected charity, Vagish told her, is run by the sister of a political party
leader running for Premier in the upcoming election. This political party leader is projected to
win the election, and has not yet voiced her support for Provincial Power’s controversial new
dam project.
Provincial Power has proposed building a new dam that will generate hydro-electric power to
meet growing consumer demand. This dam project is very controversial because it will displace
people from their farms, wildlife from their habitat, and flood 5345 hectares of land. The project
is strongly opposed by numerous First Nations groups and environmentalist organizations.
Rosalind has observed that, unlike in previous years, significant company resources are being
used to support the charity. Provincial Power is printing posters and sending mail at its own
expense and is using employees on company time to promote a fundraiser for the charity. When
Rosalind brought the use of company time and resources to the attention of her manager, her
concerns were dismissed. She was accused of being uncharitable.
Rosalind became increasingly concerned. It seemed to her that the selection of the charity was
corrupt and served to influence a political leader to support the controversial dam project. It also
seemed to her that the use of company time and resources to fundraise for the charity was a
betrayal of the public good. The public, and not private individuals acting as their agents, ought
to decide for themselves when to donate to charity.
Rosalind wonders how to proceed. Her manager has dismissed her concerns about the misuse of
company time and resources, and she is worried that her accusation that the selection of charity
serves to garner political favour will appear 3paranoid. Rosalind is a hard worker who likes her
job, and she doesn’t want to lose it.
What should Rosalind do?

You have to read this case : “Whistleblowing at Provincial Power.” ( last two pages of this file)
You have to include stated things in this assignment to cover everything which are following:
What is the moral problem in this case, and, what should Rosalind Mbaho do about it?
Should Mbaho be concerned with loyalty to her employer?
Your task is to provide an overview of this case, identifying the internal and external stakeholders and the obligations owed to them.
Explain the relevant moral, legal and financial considerations, and offer at least 2 distinct
ways Mbaho could proceed.
In presenting 2 or more alternative courses of action, your goal is to isolate and defend the course of action you argue balances moral, legal and financial obligations and upholds obligations to stakeholders.
You must offer a set of actionable recommendations for resolving the case, and end your paper by considering and responding to at least one objection to the course of action you recommend.
The relevant readings for this case are Sissela Bok “Whistleblowing and Professional
Responsibility”, Ronald Duska “Whistleblowing and Employee Loyalty” and David E.
Soles “Four Concepts of Loyalty.” Your paper must include discussion of at least two of
these articles.
Please note:
• Always cite the readings and not the course notes when material referenced is in our
Textbook (Honest Work: A Business Ethics Reader by Joanne B. Ciulla). Please make sure you cite using the textbook with page number included.
Whistleblowing at Provincial Power
Inspired by the case “Whistleblowing at the Phone Company” by Joseph R. Desjardins and John
J. McCall.
Rosalind Mbaho, an employee of Provincial Power, recognizes that she has divided loyalties.
The company has treated her well and, despite some minor disagreements, she gets along well
with upper management and her own department. However, Provincial Power is a Crown
Corporation, regulated by the Public Power Legacy and Heritage Contract Act. This act ensures
public ownership of Provincial Power’s resources, which includes Provincial Power’s
transmission and distribution systems, and all of Provincial Power’s existing generation and
storage assets. As such, Rosalind recognizes that her firm owes a loyalty to citizens that goes
beyond the simple responsibility that other firms owe to their consumers.
Once a year, as part of a major fund-raising drive, Provincial Power encourages its employees to
donate their personal time and money to a particular charity. The charity for each year is selected
by the Office of Corporate Communications and Public Affairs. The charities chosen in the past
have all been well-established and well-known. This year a relatively new and unknown charity
was selected, and Rosalind has a strong sense that she knows why.
Rosalind is on friendly terms with Vagish Nagota in the Office of Corporate Communications
and Public Affairs. One evening while Rosalind and Vagish were having a drink after work,
Vagish told Rosalind that this year the charity selection did not come from his office – it came
from higher up. The selected charity, Vagish told her, is run by the sister of a political party
leader running for Premier in the upcoming election. This political party leader is projected to
win the election, and has not yet voiced her support for Provincial Power’s controversial new
dam project.
Provincial Power has proposed building a new dam that will generate hydro-electric power to
meet growing consumer demand. This dam project is very controversial because it will displace
people from their farms, wildlife from their habitat, and flood 5345 hectares of land. The project
is strongly opposed by numerous First Nations groups and environmentalist organizations.
Rosalind has observed that, unlike in previous years, significant company resources are being
used to support the charity. Provincial Power is printing posters and sending mail at its own
expense and is using employees on company time to promote a fundraiser for the charity. When
Rosalind brought the use of company time and resources to the attention of her manager, her
concerns were dismissed. She was accused of being uncharitable.
Rosalind became increasingly concerned. It seemed to her that the selection of the charity was
corrupt and served to influence a political leader to support the controversial dam project. It also
seemed to her that the use of company time and resources to fundraise for the charity was a
betrayal of the public good. The public, and not private individuals acting as their agents, ought
to decide for themselves when to donate to charity.
Rosalind wonders how to proceed. Her manager has dismissed her concerns about the misuse of
company time and resources, and she is worried that her accusation that the selection of charity
serves to garner political favour will appear 3paranoid. Rosalind is a hard worker who likes her
job, and she doesn’t want to lose it.
What should Rosalind do?