We've Dealt With the Horn, Now How About the Whistle?

You’ve heard our concern about the “information lock down” in City government that makes it difficult for Council, and, therefore, the public, to get a complete picture-- for better or for worse-- of what’s going on in City Hall. It can also prevent good solutions to problems from bubbling up from staff to the policymakers.

Our own reader comments have suggested methods of facilitating better communication between those doing their jobs “on the ground” and Council, including the idea of a ‘dead drop’ or an ombudsman. All of this discussion was in the context of improving services.

But many agencies are currently looking at the communication issue from the perspective of a whistleblower. A whistleblower is someone within a company or system who reports wrongdoing that he or she becomes aware of from within that position. The Government Accountability Project is a good source of information on this concept. You could also check out the U.S. Office of Special Counsel that is currently responsible for protecting federal employees who alert their superiors to questionable activities. For a review of this legislation in a larger context, you can check out this political science article: click here.

The practice leads to positive changes to the system, but often negative consequences for the person doing the reporting. The information provided by employees who speak out usually exposes practices that put management in a bad light, and thus puts the whistleblowers at risk for some kind of retaliation. After sounding the alarm they become outcasts, and are soon forgotten, marginalized, or driven out of the organization. In other words, no good deed goes unpunished.

Fearing management may take a “shoot the messenger approach,” many would-be whistleblowers remain silent. That’s why a clear procedure for raising issues is needed with solid guarantees that there will be no repercussions for responsible reporting. An example can be seen here.

In other words, to encourage employees to do the right thing, those in charge must send a clear message that they want to know what’s going on and that they will act in a responsible way with any information they are given. On the other hand, they must also make clear that the goal of information sharing is the improvement of the organization, not the punishment or embarrassment of any individual. Striking that balance will encourage people to come forward while reassuring everyone that blowing the whistle is a serious matter not to be abused.

We’re not aware of any situation in our City government at the moment that cries out for a whistle. But, it makes sense for any legislative body that is committed to good government to have a whistleblower policy in case a situation arises that warrants someone speaking out.

As we stated above, this topic is being discussed at various levels of government and private industry. Just last year both houses of Congress passed the bipartisan-sponsored Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act which builds upon existing legislation from the 1990s. While the legislation was praised by the Government Accountability Project, supporters have been told that President Bush will veto it. You can read about that here.

Closer to home, the Democrat and Chronicle just reported on the Greece School Board’s approach to whistleblowing (click here to read the article). The proposal is still in draft form, but as the comments on the D&C’s website indicate, there are concerns with implementation of the policy. Specifically, there is doubt that the governing body (in this case the school board) would act on the information but instead might actually condone the bad practices being reported.

While the method may need some adjustments, we agree with the spirit of the proposal. Employees need to feel that the board is truly committed to protecting the public interest, and that includes fair employment, spending, and policy decision. Having a mechanism for those within the system to report suspected abuses of power, is an essential part of that commitment.

The horn on top of city hall was determined to have a significant public purpose, and we believe the whistle within is important as well. We’re interested in your thoughts on this idea and how it might work in Geneva. Give your feedback by clicking on the ‘responses’ link below.