The regulatory compliance of the manufacturers is governed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). According to Breville (2011), EPA is mandated under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) to regulate industrial, household, and manufacturing of solid and dangerous wastes. The major objective of the RCRA is the protection of citizens from the dangers of waste disposal, recovering and recycling energy and natural resources for conservation, minimizing or eliminating waste, and cleaning the spilled, leaked, or inappropriately disposed of wastes. In essence then, environmental protection and policing is the core duty of EPA. Apart from protecting the environment, the also observe changes in the environmental trends, which ideally, put them in a position to detect negligence or deterioration warning signs early.
In the case at hand, the president, either through negligence or intention to avoid the responsibility, ignores a vital report from the internal study indicating that the paint leeches have been found at the bottom of the boat and into the marine environment. The report also indicated that the paint can also create congenital disabilities to marine life. Therefore, the president's action amounts to a serious ethical concern because he opted to disregard experts report even after it indicated that the life of marine life was in danger. Worse still, the president also went ahead and directed that the email which contained the report be deleted. His acts amount to criminal acts, and so, legal actions should be taken against him. Prudently, being the president of the marine paint manufacturing plant, he would have acted promptly after receiving the report. He would have taken necessary steps by seeking to find the cause of the problem and what could be done to solve it. Besides, he would have contacted the environmental protection agency to access the damage and mitigate further birth defects to the marine life. However, the vice President was right to alert the President about marine paint leech.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
On his side, Erick should acknowledge that he has a responsibility to ask questions, seek direction, and report suspected defiance regarding compliance with the regulations to his boss or the compliance officer. Ideally, any employee who has a valid ground to establish that an employee or representative of a company has engaged or planning to engage in company-related conducts that are in contravention with applicable laws or code of conduct, he or she should report such information to the supervisor or the officer in charge of the compliance. Therefore, Erick should have first of all reach out his immediate boss, the vice president and seek his opinion on the matter. If by any chance the vice president agrees to discuss the issue with the president and resolve it, the better. However, if both the president and the vice president refused, then Erick will still have an option of reporting the issue to the relevant regulatory body, in this case, the EPA.
Regarding the job security, Erick has no reason to fear reporting since the company is legally restricted from disciplining, discriminating against or react against any of its employees who report such conducts. However, if it is established that the report was made with the deliberate knowledge to falsely accuse the company, then an action can be taken against such employee who falsely accuses the company (Joon-hyeong Kim, 2014). In the present case, Erick has tangible evidence to prove his case, and so, he should not fear. After the concerned agency has received the information about the alleged paint fleece from the marine paint manufacturing plant, he or she is expected to evaluate the information, assess whether there is need to carry out an investigation, if so, initiate the investigation and finally, take action against the perpetrators.
Reference
Breville, M. (2011). US Environmental Protection Agency Tribal Environmental Health Research Program. Epidemiology , 22 , S115. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/01.ede.0000392021.64753.75
Joon-hyeong Kim. (2014). Ethical and law violations contained in Yadam, the Cultural Historical Meaning. DONAM OHMUNHAK , 27 (null), 37-66. http://dx.doi.org/10.17056/donam.2014.27.37
