Committing to Effective “Integrity” Protection


For some reason this article keeps poking at me.

I am asking and please will someone from the OECD or BIAC explain to me how using the word Whistleblower is empowering people of high levels of integrity to step up, encouraging or inspiring people to do the right thing.  I do not see or feel the logic in this.  Labeling people with this term, which also means, rat, snitch, stool pigeon, traitor, turncoat, weasel, it is perpetuating what it is that you wish to eliminate or is that your intention?

This “Protection” by the OECD is making a lot of unethical people very happy, it is making there unethical behavior so much easier to get away with, and it supports them, is that your intention OECD?  To help unethical governments, businesses, and entrepreneurs to continue with their lack of integrity, because if that is the case you are doing a great job.

Keep up the good work!  with supporting unethical people with low levels of integrity.

I would love to hear from the OECD or BIAC to explain to me how using the word Whistleblower is going to encourage, inspire, motivate or support anyone to step up!  I don’t see it … I just don’t see it!

Evelyn Waterhouse ACC