ENQUIRY CONTACT FORM
PLEASE CLICK FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION AND ADVICE


EMPLOYMENT LAW UPDATES PLEASE CLICK HERE FOR LATEST NEWS AND CASE REVIEWS

 

back to home page

WHISTLEBLOWING

The Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998 protects workers who 'blow the whistle' about wrongdoing. It makes provision about the kinds of disclosures which may be protected; the circumstances in which such disclosures are protected; and the persons who may be protected.

Persons who may be protected by the new provisions against unfair dismissal or being subjected to detriment

The provisions introduced by the Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998 protect most workers from being subjected to a detriment by their employer. Detriment may take a number of forms, such as denial of promotion, facilities or training opportunities which the employer would otherwise have offered. Employees who are protected by the provisions may make a claim for unfair dismissal if they are dismissed for making a protected disclosure. Workers who are not employees may not claim unfair dismissal; however, if their contract has been terminated by the employer because they made a protected disclosure, they may instead make a complaint that they have been subjected to a detriment.

Subject to some limited exceptions, the new provisions protect persons who work under contracts of employment; those who work personally for someone else (under a "worker's" contract) but are not genuinely self-employed; homeworkers; certain agency workers; National Heath Service practitioners such as GPs, certain dentists, pharmacists and opticians; and certain categories of trainees.

Qualifying Disclosures

Certain kinds of disclosures qualify for protection ("qualifying disclosures"). Qualifying disclosures are disclosures of information which the worker reasonably believes tend to show one or more of the following matters is either happening now, took place in the past, or is likely to happen in the future :

  • a criminal offence;
  • the breach of a legal obligation;
  • a miscarriage of justice;
  • a danger to the health or safety of any individual;
  • damage to the environment; or
  • deliberate covering up of information tending to show any of the above five matters.

It should be noted that in making a disclosure the worker must have reasonable belief that the information disclosed tends to show one or more of the offences or breaches listed above ('a relevant failure'). The belief need not be correct - it might be discovered subsequently that the worker was in fact wrong - but the worker must show that he held the belief, and that it was a reasonable belief in the circumstances at the time of disclosure.

Protection under the provisions applies even if the qualifying disclosure concerns a relevant failure which took place overseas, or where the law applying to the relevant failure was not that of the United Kingdom.

Circumstances in which disclosures are protected (a "protected disclosure")

Making a qualifying disclosure to the employer or via internal procedures

A qualifying disclosure will be a protected disclosure where it is made:

(a) to the worker's employer, either directly to the employer or by procedures authorised by the employer for that purpose; or
(b) to another person whom the worker reasonably believes to be solely or mainly responsible for the relevant failure.

The only additional requirement on the worker is that he should act in good faith. No other requirement is necessary to qualify for protection.

Making a qualifying disclosure to a “”prescribed person”

Workers who are concerned about wrongdoing or failures can make disclosures to a person or body which has been prescribed by the Secretary of State for the purpose of receiving disclosures about the matters concerned. If a worker makes a qualifying disclosure to such persons, it will be a protected disclosure provided the worker:-

  • makes the disclosure in good faith;
  • reasonably believes that the information, and any allegation it contains, are substantially true; and
  • reasonably believes that the matter falls within the description of matters for which the person or body has been prescribed. (For example, breaches of health and safety regulations can be brought to the attention of the Health and Safety Executive or appropriate local authority, or environmental dangers can be notified to the Environment Agency.)

Making a qualifying disclosure to a legal adviser

A qualifying disclosure will be a protected disclosure if it is made to a legal adviser in the course of obtaining legal advice. There are no further conditions attached.

Making a qualifying disclosure to a Minister

A qualifying disclosure made in good faith by a worker, employed in a Government-appointed organisation, such as a non-departmental public body, will be a protected disclosure if made to a Government Minister (either directly or via departmental officials).

Making a qualifying disclosure about an exceptionally serious failure

A qualifying disclosure made about a relevant failure which is exceptionally serious will be a protected disclosure if the worker:-

  • makes the disclosure in good faith;
  • reasonably believes that the information disclosed, and any allegation contained in it, are substantially true; and
  • does not act for personal gain.

Also, it must be reasonable for the worker to make the disclosure in view of all the circumstances, having regard in particular to the identity of the person to whom the disclosure is made. Note that the relevant failure must be exceptionally serious. This will be a matter of fact, and not simply a matter of the worker reasonably believing it to be exceptionally serious.

Making a qualifying disclosure more generally

A qualifying disclosure will be a protected disclosure if the following conditions are met:

Firstly, the worker must:-

  • make the disclosure in good faith
  • reasonably believe that the information, and any allegation contained in it, are substantially true, and
  • not act for personal gain.

In addition, one or more of the following conditions must be met:

the worker reasonably believed that he would be subjected to a detriment by his employer if disclosure were to be made to the employer or to a prescribed person;

  • in the absence of an appropriate prescribed person, the worker reasonably believed that disclosure to the employer would result in the destruction or concealment of information about the wrongdoing;
  • the worker had previously disclosed substantially the same information to his employer or to a prescribed person.

Finally, it must be reasonable for the worker to make the disclosure. The employment tribunal will decide whether the worker acted reasonably, in all the circumstances, but in particular will take into account:

the identity of the person to whom the disclosure was made (eg, it may be more likely to be considered reasonable to disclose to a professional body that has responsibility for standards and conduct in a particular field, such as accountancy or medicine, than to the media);

  • the seriousness of the relevant failure;
  • whether the relevant failure is continuing or is likely to occur again;
  • whether the disclosure breaches the employer's duty of confidentiality to others (eg, information that is made available by the worker may contain confidential details about a client);
  • what action has or might reasonably be expected to have been taken if a disclosure was made previously to the employer or a prescribed person; and
  • whether the worker complied with any internal procedures approved by the employer if a disclosure was made previously to the employer.

Employment Tribunals and Remedies

Workers protected by the provisions (including employees) can complain that they have been subjected to detriment by their employer for making a protected disclosure. As noted earlier, an 'employee' can make a claim of unfair dismissal; a 'worker' who is not an employee and whose contract has been terminated by his employer because he made a protected disclosure can claim that he has been subjected to a detriment.

As with many other claims to employment tribunals, the complaint should normally be made within three months of the dismissal or detriment. However, from 1 October 2004, with the introduction of statutory dismissal, disciplinary and grievance procedures, the time limit will be extended, for claims made by employees, in specified circumstances connected with those procedures. The tribunal can also consider a complaint made outside the three-month time limit (either by an employee or by a 'worker' ) if they believe it was not reasonably practicable for the employee to have made the complaint within it and that it has been made within such further period as they consider reasonable.

Where a tribunal finds that a complaint of unfair dismissal is justified, it will order re-instatement or re-employment, or the payment of compensation. Where a worker complains that he has been subjected to a detriment and the tribunal finds the complaint well-founded, it will make a declaration to that effect and may order the payment of compensation.

back to home page

 

Employment Law Procedures - view section

Tribunal Claims - view section

Sample Documents - view section