Eileen Foster In The Countrywide Whistleblower Case

As a government investigator, I would agree with the Department of Labor’s decision to rule in favor of Eileen Foster in the Countrywide whistleblower case. Eileen Foster was an executive at Countrywide who was responsible for the internal monitoring of fraud (La Roche, 2011). According to Ms. Foster, she was continuing to uncover clearly fraudulent, unethical actions by the company in relation to its mortgage loans. Ms. Foster states that she found forged document and other fraudulent activity. When Ms. Foster reported this to the company’s leadership, little action was taken. Bank of America acquired the company after Countrywide’s downfall, and Ms. Foster was promoted. Ms. Foster continued to push the issue of fraud to her supervisors and

Portions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, and the Corporate and Criminal Fraud Accountability Act, were both meant to protect whistleblowers from retaliatory personnel actions. The Dodd-Frank Act also increased financial incentives for whistleblowers whose information regarding illegal activities helps the government recover amounts over $1 million dollars. However, there are concerns that these monetary rewards for whistleblowing may discourage employees from reporting the issues first to the company for resolution. The Sarbane-Oxley Act not only explicitly prohibits employers from retaliating against employees for whistleblowing, it also sets forth criminal penalties for executives that take the retaliatory actions. Despite these alleged protections, the majority of whistleblowers do indeed lose their previous jobs, and it is at times difficult for these whistleblowers to win their cases in court (Ferrell, Fraedrich, & Ferrell, 2015). Also, in the case of whistleblower Eileen Foster, it does not appear that any executives responsible for her termination. The legislation may exist, but it does not appear to be a major factor in discoursing these type of retaliatory behaviors by executives towards

Organization’s that have appropriate internal reporting mechanisms that are anonymous and viewed positively by employees tend to have more ethical organizational cultures (Ferrell, Fraedrich, & Ferrell, 2015). Harlow (2016) points out that it is important for both internal and external whistleblowers protection from retaliation. However, there are concerns regarding whether or not the Dodd-Frank legislation’s incentive provisions lead to frivolous complaints and an unnecessary administrative burden. Employees may be more likely to externally report issues than to use internal reporting mechanisms due to the monetary incentive involved in reporting directly to regulatory authorities (Harlow,