In any organization, the employees and employers operate under a code of conduct. It is the responsibility of each party to uphold the stipulations as provided in the code of conduct. Violation of these stipulations has dire consequences. Abiding by the given code of ethics applies to all parties involved whether seniors or juniors.
In the case of Two Who Made Waves for the Navy, I strongly believe that Storms had a responsibility to blow the whistle on the violations that he witnessed in Lemoore Naval Air Base. Despite the fact that doing would mess the good reputation of his seniors, Storms was right in standing up for what he believed was ethical. His whistle-blowing was permissible because it was a requirement as per moral ethics to ensure that honesty was upheld. Particularly, it was totally unethical for the defense contractors to overcharge for the spare parts that Storm had listed (Shaw, 2010).
Ahearn’s motive was to ensure that he did not perpetuate water pollution. His whistle-blowing was permissible because he had a moral requirement to preserve the environment. It was his responsibility to stand up against the job specifications that he did not believe in at all. This was irrespective of the impacts that this would have on his employment.
Storm’s situation was an example of an ethics dilemma. It is possible that if one is faced with such a situation they would feel torn between doing what is morally expected of them, and following their prudential concerns such as job security. If one is overtaken by prudential concern, one would end up not saying a word. However, those who choose to meet their moral responsibilities stand up against all odds just like Storm did. Therefore, the course of action is totally dependent on one’s priorities.