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.

Part A Question 4: Use the AAA Ethical Decision-making model to review the decision by Sally McDow to “blow
the whistle”. Was her decision ethical? Use the facts from the case to support your responses to each step of
the AAA model (300–400 words).
Answer: There are seven steps given in AAA Ethical decision-making model which assist parties in taking ethical decision. McDow
took the decision to leak the information regarding the unethical operations of the company which were adversely affecting the
environment, local communities and its employees (OHS Career, 2017). The first step is evaluation of the facts. The facts of this case
provided that the company knew that paying the fine will be cheaper than to change its operations, therefore, it was violating the
policies implemented by the government to protect the environment. The management was also bullying it staff members so that they
did not take any action against the corporation. The second step is evaluation of the ethical issue. The ethical issue is relating to
protection of the environment and the rights of employees and the failure of the company and its managers to act ethically. The third
step is identification of principles and values. The regulations are imposed by the government to the leaking of hazardous gas;
however, Origin Energy calculated that paying of fines would be cheaper.
The company violated environmental and other regulatory requirements which include the provisions given under Fair Work Act 2009
to stop bullying and harassment. The fourth step is identification of alternative course of action. The alternative course of actions
includes doing nothing regarding the issue. The second option is to “blow the whistle” by notifying the governmental authority
regarding the operations of the company. The fifth step is implementation of principles identified in third step on the options identified

in forth step. The principles of environment and regulator provision along with Fair Work Act are violated in the first option, but, these
principles are fulfilled in the second option which was selected by McDow. The sixth step is evaluation of consequences of the
outcomes. Consequences of the first decision are adverse impact on the environment along with unhealthy work environment for the
staff members of the company. The consequences of the second decision are ethical since they assist in complying with environmental,
regulatory and Fair Work Act requirement which is beneficial for the environment and employees of Origin Energy (Slezak, 2017).
The seventh step is making the decision. The second decision is ethical in this scenario which is made by McDow.
References:
OHS Career. (2017). Strong Origin Allegations leaked. Retrieved from http://www.ohscareer.com.au/archived-news/strong-origin-
allegations-leaked
Slezak, M. (2017). 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
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.

Part B Question: Assume that Origin Energy does not (or did not) have an effective ethics program at the time of
the events described in the case study. Advise Origin Energy why they should have an ethics program, what
needs to be done to make it effective, and what it should contain. Emphasise how an effective ethics program
could have prevented the need for a whistleblower to highlight the problems with Origin’s operations. Support
your answers with examples from the case study (1,200–1,600 words).
Answer: Effective implementation of an ethics program assists in addressing the ethical dilemmas faced by an enterprise. In this case,
Origin Energy did not have an ethics program which would have prevented the need of a whistle-blower to highlight the programs
related to the operations of Origin. Firstly, the corporation should focus on changing its vision statement. The vision statement of a
company directs its operations and assists it in conducting its operations ethically. Since the operations of Origin Energy directly
influence the environment, the company should focus on incorporating the protection of environmental policies into its vision
statement (Slezak, 2017). It vision should be focused on achieving its objectives while ensuring that the environmental resources are
protected. The value statement of the company should also depict similar values. Currently, the values of the company include working
as a team, becoming customer champion and being accountable for its operations. However, the corporation has failed to comply with
these values. Most importantly, its values did not incorporate protection of the environmental resources while conducting the business
of the enterprise (Origin Energy, 2018). It should focus on ensuring that being a team member means that the employees are
considered as a part of the company, and they should not be mistreated. The values of the company should focus on banning bullying
and harassment at the workplace and ensure that it ethically comply with environmental provisions. The next step of implementing an
ethical program is establishing a code of conduct.

If Origin Energy would have implemented an effective code of conduct, then the requirement of a whistle-blower would have
eliminated, and the company would have able to resolve its ethical dilemmas. The code of conduct should clearly specify the way in
which the company performs its work, and it should also raise awareness between employees so that they know how to deal if they
face an ethical dilemma such as bullying, harassment or misconduct of senior officers. The code of conduct should specify clearly the
role of senior management in the operations of implementing these provisions, and the conduct should be focused on achieving the
values of the enterprise. Moreover, the key issue with Origin Energy was that McDow did not have an ethics officer or committee to go
to if she wanted to report the operations of senior managers. McDow complied with the hierarchy procedure due to which she was fired
from the organisations (Ferguson, 2017). Therefore, Origin Energy should focus on hiring an ethics officer who should be an
independent party who act without biases when dealing with employees. The officer should have the authority to directly approach the
board of directors of the company along with governmental authorities in case the directors are responsible for acting unethically. The
appointment of an ethics committee is also a key procedure since it encourages employees to bring the issues which they face in the
organisation in front of the committee. The committee should conduct internal audit and ensure that the management and employees
are not violating any provisions of the code of conduct.
The committee should also provide annual reports in which it describes the ethical performance of the enterprise. One of the key issues

faced by McDow, in this case, was lack of ethics communication strategy. She had to complain regarding the issues to the senior
management who were violating the policies themselves (Anti-Corruption Digest, 2017). Moreover, she was unable to communicate
the issues relating to bullying and harassment which she faced in the organisation. Therefore, implementation of an effective
communication strategy assists the company in ensuring that its employees are able to talk with the senior level management along
with ethics community to share the issues which they face in the organisation. Lack of effective communication channels resulted in
adversely affecting the operations of Origin Energy (Slezak, 2017). Another key step of ethics programs is providing ethics training to
the management and the employees of the company. Effective training assists in increasing awareness between the parties regarding
the ethical issues faced by them and it assists the management in addressing such issues without the requirement of whistle-blowers.
The training can be given to the management to specify how and why they should act ethically and treat employees with care rather
than bullying and harassment. The training should also be given to the employees to tell them that they can share their issues with the
senior level management. The training also defines the way in which an ethical dilemma should be reported and addressed in the
organisation which removes the requirement of a whistle-blower and it did not cause a media circus which adversely impacts the
reputation of the company.
The corporation should also provide ethics helpline to its employees to ensure that parties who wanted to learn more about the code of
conduct and ethical policies in the organisations can resolve their doubts. The ethics program should also measure the performance of

the enterprise and provide rewards to those individuals who take ethical decisions in the company. For example, rather than blowing
the whistle, the employees should notify the ethics officer or committee regarding the unethical behaviour of senior management to
ensure that the issues remain in the organisations and it is resolved at the level without leaking the news in the media. The employees
or managerial personnel who act ethically should be rewarded by the enterprise. In case of Origin Energy, no rewards were given to
McDow; instead, she was terminated from her job which shows that the whole incident could have been avoided in case the company
had implemented an ethics program (Ferguson, 2016). Implementation of a program is not enough; the corporation is required to
continuously monitor and track the program to ensure that it is working effectively. Periodical reports should be prepared by the
committee to ensure that the program is being continuously watched by the senior level management to ensure that these parties are
tracking the issues relating to ethics faced by employees in the company. Without periodic evaluation, effective implementation of the
ethics program is not possible. Lastly, ethical leadership is a key part of an effective ethics program.
Without strong and ethical leadership, it is not possible for an ethics program to work properly. In case the leader is not supporting the
actions of the ethics program, then it becomes difficult for the employees to act ethically in the workplace as well. In the case of Origin
Energy, the leaders failed to ensure that the operations are conducted ethically in the company. They failed to ensure that the middle-
level management is not bullying or harassing the employees. The failure of the leadership is one of the biggest reason due to which
Origin Energy faced those charges. Since the leaders were not acting ethically themselves, it becomes easier for other to act unethically

as well. The employees such as McDow who wanted to raise a voice were treated badly in the organisation. It shows that leadership of
a company should be ethical in order to ensure that the ethics program is working towards address the issues faced by the employees
and resolving them without blowing the whistle (Slezak, 2017). The incident of Origin Energy would have been avoided if the leaders
had acted ethically by implementing an ethics program which would have prevented the need for a whistle-blower to highlight the
ethical problems relating to the operations of Origin Energy.
References:
Anti-Corruption Digest. (2017). Chilling tale of Origin Energy whistleblower. Retrieved from https://anticorruptiondigest.com/anti-
corruption-news/2017/01/26/chilling-tale-of-origin-energy-whistleblower/#axzz5SsKqbJHM
Ferguson, A. (2016). Origin Energy's Sally McDow exposes dire whistleblower protections. Retrieved from
https://www.afr.com/leadership/workplace/origin-energy-case-spurs-discussion-of-whistleblower-protections-20160214-gmtr7h
Ferguson, A. (2017). Whistleblowers need more protection. Retrieved from https://pressfreedom.org.au/whistleblowers-need-more-
protection-fe823afcb4bf
Origin Energy. (2018). Our purpose. Retrieved from https://www.originenergy.com.au/about/who-we-are/our-purpose.html
Slezak, M. (2017). 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 (20):
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.