The decision to keep receiving the bonuses has significant benefits.Overall, it would be an opportunity to earn an extra income. Ifsomeone else was to learn about the current trend, the chances arethat it would not be possible to continue getting the benefits.Because of the same, it would be possible to keep receiving the perksand let no one get to learn about it. Further, there is the benefitof being able to meet the expenses that one could not have been ableto meet with the original wage. No harm exists in continuing to enjoythe benefits.
However, deciding to not to tell anybody may have detrimentaleffects. If such a deed was to get to the senior managers, it couldresult in punitive actions such being relieved of duties. It would beworse off than having to earn the usual salary without the bonus. Theextra income would be okay for as long as nobody gets to learn aboutits existence.
Ethical issues are imminent in keeping the issue a secret. It is notright to receive perks from where one has not put effort. Virtueethics identifies the need for one to act in a right way (Swanton,2003). Keeping quiet is contrary to the principle of virtue ethics.
Speaking to the manager could be a better option because he would bebetter off to make the decision on the way forward. The manager hasthe authority to decide on what should be done. Informing the managerwould mean one is shelved of the consequences that arise if the issuewas to get known. Further, waiting for him to explain on the issuewould be beneficial since he would have taken the distress emanatingfrom keeping the entire issue personal.
Speaking to the manager may be a challenge since the response of themanager is not known. If the manager was enjoying similar benefitsand was pretending about the whole issue, then he could take anadverse action. It is because the manager would have realized thatsomeone else has learned about the fact that something is wrong. Itmay not be wise speaking to the manager especially if the response hewould give is unknown.
Failing to talk to an established authority could result in legalproceedings being initiated on grounds of not reporting thediscrepancy that has been in the organization.
Talking to an individual at a higher rank than the manager could be areasonable move since the issue would be tackled from the highestpoint of authority. It would be an opportunity to initiateinvestigations into the issue. Further, it could be an opportunity toestablish a working relationship based on trust with the highestauthority. The chances are that a good rapport would have beencreated because it indicates one’s integrity regarding companyaffairs. Further, it would be easy to continue with normal operationsespecially after getting direction from the senior boss. If he saysit is right to continue enjoying the perks, then so be it. If hedecides to take an investigative action, one would be absolved of anywrongdoing.
The primary disadvantage is the lack of knowledge on what the seniorboss would decide. If it is a boardroom arrangement, it could resultin severed relations at work. The manager could come up with anexcuse of sacking me because I tried to expose the wrong doings inthe company. I would lose my job and could get into financialtrouble.
The ethical issue that arises regarding doing the right thing for agreater good according to utilitarian ethics (McGee, 2014). Thefamily benefits from the huge perks, so does those enjoying the sameat higher ranks in the chain of command. Revealing the issue couldresult in a stop of the issue, and many would lose. Such a move wouldbe in violation of utilitarian ethics.
Reporting to relevant bodies such as the police, newspaper, federalregulators have the benefit of one getting immunity if investigationswere to be launched and wrong doing established. It would be possiblefor one to get recognition for the good job done. Because of thesame, it could be a chance to get a promotion or better get an offerat a different organization with a higher income.
However, deciding to outsiders could result in detrimental effectsespecially regarding the issue of the image of the organization beingtainted. If outsiders were to learn about a shady deal beingconducted at the organization, it would result in a bad image for theorganization. Further, relevant stakeholders could shelve off theirbusiness dealings with the organization. The effect would beoperations of the organization being affected. The turn of eventscould trickle down to all employees of the organization where theyend up losing their jobs.
Legal issues that emanate can be attributed to the fact that FederalRegulators could initiate investigations and those culpable asked totake responsibility.
McGee, R. W. (2014).Applying Utilitarian Ethics and Rights Theory to the Regulation ofInsider Trading in Transition Economies. Available at SSRN2419827.
Swanton, C. (2003).Virtue ethics: A pluralistic view.