Should Patricia Dunn from HP have been called to resign?Yes. If Patricia Dunn decided to outsource an investigation firm, then she should have been responsible for the on-going progress of the investigation. Patricia should obtained legal counseled and fined legal ways to discover the problem at hand. Ms. Dunn was at the center of a controversy regarding her effort to investigate board-level leaks to reporters in 2005-2006. HP obtained the personal telephone records of HP board members and reporters who covered HP through a practice called pretexting.
It is illegal under California law to use deceit and trickery to obtain private records of individuals. In addition to the deceptive trade practice statutes, the actions of the HP officers, their lawyers and investigators may also violate various fraud statutes, like the mail fraud (18 USC 1341), wire fraud (18 USC 1343) and computer fraud (18 USC 1030) statutes, as well as various state criminal fraud and larceny by trick statutes.
Patricia's action meant well, to protect the organization. However, when facing such challenges, we must take in consideration all ethical factors, deontological and utilitarianism.
Utilitarian Aspect of informational privacy for Employers:It is important for employees to establish an informational agreement, where protect the organization from exposing its informational practices. This action will serve as a shield and will give the organization rights to ensure no employees are divulging company information to outside sources that can jeopardize the organizational success. It will serve as one of the mechanisms to ensure success to it stakeholders and shareholders. The right of the employees will not be violated as they agree to enter and work for an organization that protects it information, this part of Normative Ethics as (contractual rights).
Utilitarian Aspect of informational privacy for Employees:It is also important that all employees abide to...