Lowry vs. Walmart
Learning Team A
Com/295
June 6, 2016

Lowry vs. Walmart

There are times when people do not feel right about a given situation and are compelled to disclose this information to the company, but this time, it did not turn out in the employees favor. "But I acted in good faith, just pointing out that there might have been some wrongdoing," said Lowry. During her day-long orientation that focused mainly on ethics, she was instructed what to do if someone had an idea that there was something unethical going on. Lowry now finds herself looking for a job so that she can continue to support her two children. This is not the first time Wal-Mart has been under scrutiny for controversial Ethics Violations or Defamation of Character suits. She should not be forced out of her position. According to "To Whom Does an Ethical Business Owe a Responsibility" (2004), four groups of people are generally responsible for the success of a business: Employees, customers, the community, and shareholders". In Wal-Mart vs. Lowry, Wal-Mart has an obligation to their employee. Why send her through the process of having to apply for a position in another department when she is already and employee? This is not only unfair to their employee but unjust. This unethical matter is now a public matter. Knowing how Wal-Mart has treated their own, who was only looking out for the company, does not look good to dedicated consumers. Wal-Mart has an obligation to prove to consumers, their current and future employees, and shareholders that they not only care about their employees but can make smart business decisions. Wal-Mart has yet to prove this to anyone. This causes one to question their credibility. Credibility is the quality of being trusted and believed in. Credibility is convincing the employees and customers that you are able to