2 December 2016
What Would You Do?
1. You are an entry-level worker in the audit department of the Internal Revenue Service, and you have stumbled across evidence of a program to turn off the audit process for major contributors to the current president’s reelection campaign. In effect, select taxpayers can make any claim on their tax returns without fear of being audited or investigated. What would you do?
Since the activity above is highly illegal, that is tampering with IRS information, I would report it immediately. This situation not only would put myself at risk but it gives others an unfair advantage to opening “cheat” the system.
2. A coworker complains to you that he is sick of seeing the company pollute the waters of a nearby stream by dumping runoff water into it from the manufacturing process. He plans to send an anonymous email to the EPA to inform the agency of the situation. What would you do?
In the case that a coworker plans to expose the company on an unethical issue that exists, I would happily join then. Whistleblowers have a right to be protected and if that can be upheld, I wouldn’t have a second thought.
1. Why does IBM’s supply chain program have such a large impact on environmental health?
IBM, over anything else, puts ethical practices into motion allowing for a thin margin of contribution to pollution and the decline of the environment. IBM looks past HSE as the cost associated with non-compliance but the impact that certain practices have on everyone as a whole.
2. How do companies like Cisco ensure that their suppliers are complying with their supply chain programs?
By checking in and having a series of checks and balances during production. Creating close relationships is the best way to ensure that who you are doing business with is within compliance with supply chain programs.
3. How might IBM influence members of its supply chain to follow its environmental program?
According to their site, IBM is moving away from a compliance-driven model to a more proactive and value-based risk management model. This puts HSE, or health, safety and environment first.
1. Do you support the implementation of enhancements such as photo matching and access to additional government databases to improve the accuracy of the E-Verify system? Why or why not?
Having not heard of e-verify before now, it sounds like the intentions are in good faith. However, there is that urging question regarding how much information is out there on an individual. If a database such as this were to be compromised, serious effects would follow.
2. If you were the owner of a small business, would you use the E-Verify system to screen prospective workers? Why or why not?
While e-verify is an ultra-quick way to screen would-be employees, the risks should be weighed against the conventional methods of screening employees before this is used.
3. Would you favor mandatory use of the E-Verify system at large corporations and government agencies? Why or why not?
As mentioned before, the time saving would be mind boggling and the hiring of employees may not get any easier than using such a system but as I said, what is being given up moving from conventional ways to electronic means of identification? Is it all benefits moving to such a service?