ACCT19083: Analyzing Workplace Ethics - A Case Study, Term 2 2018

This assignment is a case study analyzing ethical issues within a workplace environment, focusing on bullying, harassment, and whistleblowing, as well as the ethical considerations surrounding discipline and dismissal. It references a specific case involving Origin Energy and a whistleblower, Sally McDow, to illustrate these concepts. The analysis draws upon Australian legal frameworks such as the Fair Work Act 2009 and guidance from ASIC to evaluate the ethical dimensions of the situations presented. The assignment discusses the rights and responsibilities of both employers and employees in maintaining an ethical workplace, highlighting the importance of fair and reasonable treatment, proper dismissal procedures, and protection for whistleblowers. The student concludes that the company in question acted unethically in its treatment of employees and its disregard for safety protocols.

ACCT19083 Final Assignment
Term 2, 2018
Student ID:………………………………. Student name……………………………………………………..
Marker’s overall comments: The markers may include any
final comments here.
Overall Mark (Total) out of 40:
0

Part A Question 1: Describe the ethical issues inherent in bullying and harassment in the workplace. Can
bullying be linked to management style? Use the case study to inform your answer (300–400 words).

Answer: Bullying and harassment are two terms related to employment agreements. Bullying includes a situation where an
employee faces a behaviour that creates risk to his/her health and put a question mark on the safety of the same. Bullying and
harassment counted as an unethical act. Fair work commission is a workplace relations tribunal in Australia that looks after the cases of
bullying and harassment (Fair Work Ombudsman, 2018). In the given case study, the company was involved in the business of
processing and development of gas and energy; it was the liability of the same to provide a safe and healthy working environment to
the employees as risk was higher because of nature of work.
From the view point of moral ethics, it becomes responsibility of every organisation to consider the health of it is employees. If an
organisation not doing so and even doing some activities that cause negative impact on the health of the employees, then such ethical
issues inherent bullying and harassment (Health Direct, 2018). In the given case, the involved ethical issue was ignorance of the
company in respect to gas leakage that will be treated as Bullying. Further, it has also been reported in whistle blowing that company
was engaged in the activities of doing harassment of employees if anyone was attempted to report the unethical issues. It is also clear
that the company has acted negligently because it had full knowledge of the subjective ethical issue. Further, in order to answer the
second part of the question, this is to state that yes bullying can be linked to the management style. If the working style of management
of a company is irresponsible, then there will be high chances of bullying. Bullying is nothing else but the unethical task that
management of the company enforced to the employees. If management of the company adopt good management style, then the ethical

issues such as bullying and harassment can be reduced.
References:
Fair Work Ombudsman. (2018). Bullying & harassment. Retrieved From:
https://www.fairwork.gov.au/employee-entitlements/bullying-and-harassment#what-to-do-if-you-think-bullying-or-harassment-has-
happened
Health Direct. (2018). Workplace bullying. Retrieved From: https://www.healthdirect.gov.au/workplace-bullying
Marker’s Comments: The marker will provide feedback here. Mark (5):
0
Exceeds Expectations
(High Distinction) 85-100%
Exceeds Expectations
(Distinction) 75 - 84%
Meets Expectations
(Credit) 65 – 74%
Meets Expectations
(Pass) 50 – 64%
Below Expectations
(Fail) below 50%
Demonstrates a balanced and very
high level of detailed knowledge of
core concepts by providing a very
high level of analysis. Utilises
current, appropriate and credible
sources.
Demonstrates a balanced and high
level of knowledge of core
concepts by providing a high level
of analysis. Utilises mostly current,
appropriate and credible sources.
Demonstrates a good level of
knowledge of some of the core
concepts by providing some level
of analysis. Utilises some current,
appropriate and credible sources.
Demonstrates limited knowledge of
core concepts by providing a
limited level of analysis. Utilises
few current, appropriate and
credible sources.
Demonstrates little, if any,
knowledge of the core concepts
with extremely limited, if any,
analysis. Utilises little, if any,
current, appropriate and credible
sources.
Quality of writing at a very high
standard. Paragraphs are
coherently connected to each
other. Correct grammar, spelling
and punctuation.
Quality of writing is of a high
standard. Paragraphs are mostly
well structured. Few grammar,
spelling and punctuation mistakes.
Quality of writing is of a good
standard. Few grammar, spelling
and punctuation mistakes.
Some problems with sentence
structure and presentation
Frequent grammar, punctuation
and spelling mistakes. Use of
inappropriate language.
Quality of writing is at a very poor
standard so barely
understandable. Many spelling
mistakes. Little or no evidence of
proof reading.
The assessment presents a
detailed and focused summary of
the ideas presented; drawing clear
and well thought-out conclusions.
The assessment presents a fairly
detailed and focused summary of
the ideas presented; drawing fairly
clear and well thought-out
The assessment presents a
somewhat detailed and focused
summary of the ideas presented;
providing some evidence of
The assessment provides limited
detail with no clear summary of the
ideas presented; drawing limited
conclusions.
The assessment fails to provide
any clear evidence of the ideas
presented; drawing no clear
conclusions.

Exceeds Expectations
(High Distinction) 85-100%
Exceeds Expectations
(Distinction) 75 - 84%
Meets Expectations
(Credit) 65 – 74%
Meets Expectations
(Pass) 50 – 64%
Below Expectations
(Fail) below 50%
conclusions. conclusions.

Part A Question 2: What are the ethical issues involved in cases of discipline and dismissal? Make sure that you
discuss the rights of employers and employees, and use the case study to support your answer (300–400
words).
Answer: Dismissal is defined under section 386 of Fair Work Act, 2009 (Cth). According to this section, Dismissal is defined as a
situation where an employer terminates the employment of an employee or an employer forced to an employee to resign because of
his/her conduct (Mills Oakley, 2015). Therefore this can be seen that discipline and dismissal are inter related term. In most of the
conditions, the lead reason behind dismissal of an employee is his/her undisciplined behaviour. However, this would not be correct to
say that a dismissal is always an ethical action. A dismissal treated as unethical and unfair if the basis of the same is not genuine.
Many of the ethical issues are involved in the cases of dismissal. Under the area of dismissal every employer has right to dismiss an
employee if the conducts of such employee are not disciplined or are unethical. Further, in addition to an employer, an employee also
has some rights under the Fair, work ombudsman. The law states that every employee has right to seek a fair and reasonable dismissal.
It is liability of an employer to follow the rules of dismissal, notice period and pending pay while terminating an employee. In case of
unfair dismissal, an employee would have right to initiate an action against his/her employer according to the conditions mentioned
under Fair Work Act 2009. In the given case, no proper notice has been granted to Sally McDow, who was an employee of Origin
energy and was acting as a senior manager of compliance. There was no reasonable basis behind her dismissal. The Chief executive
officer dismissed Ms McDow for the reason that she was reporting unethical issues repeatedly (The Guardian, 2018). It was an

unreasonable ground to dismiss an employee and therefore the dismissal of Ms McDow was not ethical.
References:
Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth)
Mills Oakley. (2015). When is a dismissal a dismissal? Retrieved From: https://www.millsoakley.com.au/when-is-a-dismissal-a-
dismissal/
The Guardian. (2018). Origin Energy ignores coal seam gas well leaks, whistleblower says. Retrieved From:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/jan/27/origin-energy-ignores-coal-seam-gas-well-leaks-whistleblower-says
Marker’s Comments: The marker will provide feedback here. Mark (5):
0
Exceeds Expectations
(High Distinction) 85-100%
Exceeds Expectations
(Distinction) 75 - 84%
Meets Expectations
(Credit) 65 – 74%
Meets Expectations
(Pass) 50 – 64%
Below Expectations
(Fail) below 50%
Demonstrates a balanced and very
high level of detailed knowledge of
core concepts by providing a very
high level of analysis. Utilises
current, appropriate and credible
sources.
Demonstrates a balanced and high
level of knowledge of core
concepts by providing a high level
of analysis. Utilises mostly current,
appropriate and credible sources.
Demonstrates a good level of
knowledge of some of the core
concepts by providing some level
of analysis. Utilises some current,
appropriate and credible sources.
Demonstrates limited knowledge of
core concepts by providing a
limited level of analysis. Utilises
few current, appropriate and
credible sources.
Demonstrates little, if any,
knowledge of the core concepts
with extremely limited, if any,
analysis. Utilises little, if any,
current, appropriate and credible
sources.
Quality of writing at a very high
standard. Paragraphs are
Quality of writing is of a high
standard. Paragraphs are mostly
Quality of writing is of a good
standard. Few grammar, spelling
Some problems with sentence
structure and presentation
Quality of writing is at a very poor
standard so barely

Exceeds Expectations
(High Distinction) 85-100%
Exceeds Expectations
(Distinction) 75 - 84%
Meets Expectations
(Credit) 65 – 74%
Meets Expectations
(Pass) 50 – 64%
Below Expectations
(Fail) below 50%
coherently connected to each
other. Correct grammar, spelling
and punctuation.
well structured. Few grammar,
spelling and punctuation mistakes.
and punctuation mistakes. Frequent grammar, punctuation
and spelling mistakes. Use of
inappropriate language.
understandable. Many spelling
mistakes. Little or no evidence of
proof reading.
The assessment presents a
detailed and focused summary of
the ideas presented; drawing clear
and well thought-out conclusions.
The assessment presents a fairly
detailed and focused summary of
the ideas presented; drawing fairly
clear and well thought-out
conclusions.
The assessment presents a
somewhat detailed and focused
summary of the ideas presented;
providing some evidence of
conclusions.
The assessment provides limited
detail with no clear summary of the
ideas presented; drawing limited
conclusions.
The assessment fails to provide
any clear evidence of the ideas
presented; drawing no clear
conclusions.

Part A Question 3: What are the ethical issues involved with “whistleblowing”? For whistleblowing to be
conducted in an ethical manner, how should it be done? Does the case study describe ethical whistleblowing?
Explain your answer (300–400 words).
Answer: Whistleblowing is a situation where a person reports the unethical issues of a company. The Australian Securities and
Investment Commission (ASIC) have provided some guidance on the subject of whistle blowing. Further, The Treasury Laws
Amendment (Enhancing Whistle blower Protections) Bill 2017 is also there to provide protection to whistle blowers under
Corporations Act 2001 (Cth). Many ethical issues are involved in the cases of whistle blowing. These issues existed on the part of
employer as well as an employee. In many of the cases, it has been noted that an employee used this mechanism of reporting in an
unfair manner and for improper purpose. Such reporting cannot be treated as ethical whistle blowing. On the other hand in some of the
cases employer do wrong with the whistle blowers. This is the reason that the said bill and other law provide protection to such whistle
blowers.
According to the guidance provided by ASIC, a person should report only those incidents that are actually unfair and unethical. Further
a whistle blower required to follow particular hierarchy to report such issues. One is not advised to report such issues directly to media
or any outsider sources which defeat the reputation of a company (ASIC, 2018).
In the case provided hereunder, the whistle blowing done by Mrs Sally McDow is ethical as she has reported the issue to internal

management firstly. The Origin Energy lacked due care in it is operations and the company was doing so on a regular basis. Mrs Sally
McDow reported the issues many times and also prepared a proper report on the same, yet the CEO of the company did not consider
any reports presented by her. In addition to gas leakage issues, she also reported some other issues such as bullying with other
employees. In this manner, she has some what she was required to do. The employer dismissed Sally McDow, and thereafter she has
reported the issue to federal court (Ferguson, 2017). Hence this can be concluded that whistleblowing done by Mrs McDow was
ethical.
References:
ASIC. (2018). Guidance for whistleblowers. Retrieved From: https://asic.gov.au/about-asic/asic-investigations-and-enforcement/
whistleblowing/guidance-for-whistleblowers/#WhatshouldIdoifIbelieveIamawhistleblower
Corporations Act 2001 (Cth).
Ferguson, A. (2017). Chilling tale of Origin Energy whistleblower. Retrieved From: https://www.smh.com.au/business/chilling-tale-of-
origin-energy-whistleblower-20170124-gtxuhz.html
Mark (5):

Marker’s Comments: The marker will provide feedback here. 0
Exceeds Expectations
(High Distinction) 85-100%
Exceeds Expectations
(Distinction) 75 - 84%
Meets Expectations
(Credit) 65 – 74%
Meets Expectations
(Pass) 50 – 64%
Below Expectations
(Fail) below 50%
Demonstrates a balanced and very
high level of detailed knowledge of
core concepts by providing a very
high level of analysis. Utilises
current, appropriate and credible
sources.
Demonstrates a balanced and high
level of knowledge of core
concepts by providing a high level
of analysis. Utilises mostly current,
appropriate and credible sources.
Demonstrates a good level of
knowledge of some of the core
concepts by providing some level
of analysis. Utilises some current,
appropriate and credible sources.
Demonstrates limited knowledge of
core concepts by providing a
limited level of analysis. Utilises
few current, appropriate and
credible sources.
Demonstrates little, if any,
knowledge of the core concepts
with extremely limited, if any,
analysis. Utilises little, if any,
current, appropriate and credible
sources.
Quality of writing at a very high
standard. Paragraphs are
coherently connected to each
other. Correct grammar, spelling
and punctuation.
Quality of writing is of a high
standard. Paragraphs are mostly
well structured. Few grammar,
spelling and punctuation mistakes.
Quality of writing is of a good
standard. Few grammar, spelling
and punctuation mistakes.
Some problems with sentence
structure and presentation
Frequent grammar, punctuation
and spelling mistakes. Use of
inappropriate language.
Quality of writing is at a very poor
standard so barely
understandable. Many spelling
mistakes. Little or no evidence of
proof reading.
The assessment presents a
detailed and focused summary of
the ideas presented; drawing clear
and well thought-out conclusions.
The assessment presents a fairly
detailed and focused summary of
the ideas presented; drawing fairly
clear and well thought-out
conclusions.
The assessment presents a
somewhat detailed and focused
summary of the ideas presented;
providing some evidence of
conclusions.
The assessment provides limited
detail with no clear summary of the
ideas presented; drawing limited
conclusions.
The assessment fails to provide
any clear evidence of the ideas
presented; drawing no clear
conclusions.