Helen is a engineer at a large chemical plant. She has some reason to believe that the plant manager is knowingly violating local environmental laws by encouraging unsafe dumping practices. Some relevant facts about Helen's situation are as follows: A) She does have reasonable documentation of the plant managers behavior B) She has not yet gone through any of the normal organizational channels in order to resolve the conflict C) She has a reason to think that the unsafe dumping practice pose a serious threat to public health and safety According to Martin's view, does Helen have a prima facie responsibility to blow the whistle

Yes, in light of the fact that the dumping practices pose a serious (and credible) threat, she does have a prima facie obligation to blow the whistle

Explanation:

Helen has the right to blow the whistle because engineers in well protected society for whistle blowing can have legal and moral support if they disclose some irregularity and corruption in their industry. In denial of not making known the decadence in the industry exposes individuals who work there and the society at large to a risk. Safety is a primary factor in any industry and whatever isn't done well or in the right manner is a danger to everyone

answer; because many corporate watch groups will discover and publicize unethical behavior by suppliers, link it to the american company, and harm its reputation;

answerembargo;