News & Events

Whistleblowing: Government publishes new guidance for employers and regulators

Submitted By Firm: Addleshaw Goddard

Contact(s): Michael Leftley, Sarah Harrop

Author(s):

Amanda Steadman

Date Published: 6/18/2015

Article Type:

Share This:

On 20 March 2015 the Government published new non-statutory guidance for employers and regulators and a non-statutory Code of Practice for employers. Separately, the Government has also responded to the consultation on annual reporting on whistleblowing by regulators. The response confirms the Government's final proposals and outline draft regulations have also been published, although these will not come into force until after the General Election. We report below on the new guidance and the response to the consultation below.

Background

On 25 June 2013, a number of important changes were made to the existing whistleblowing legislation, chiefly, the introduction of the requirement that disclosures are protected only where there is a reasonable belief that it is made in the "public interest". In addition, the requirement that disclosures must be made in good faith in order to qualify for protection was removed. Following these reforms, the Government proceeded to issue a Call for Evidence seeking views and evidence on whether there was a case for further changes to the legislative framework.

The Call for Evidence closed on 1 November 2013 and the Government published its response in June 2014. You can read our detailed article on the response here. The recommendations for further reform were limited and concerned two key areas:

  • Better guidance: the Government committed to introduce better guidance for individuals and employers, together with a new Code of Practice.
  • Regulators to report annually: the Government also committed to introduce a new statutory obligation on requlators to report on an annual basis on the whistleblowing disclosures received. The Small Business, Enterprise and Employment Act 2015 includes a power enabling the Government to make regulations requiring regulators to report annual annually. In connection with this, a further consultation was launched on 1 August 2014 seeking views on the scope of the secondary legislation (Annual Reporting Consultation).

On 20 March 2015 the Government published new non-statutory guidance for employers and regulators and a non-statutory Code of Practice for employers. Separately, the Government has also responded to the Annual Reporting Consultation, confirming the Government's final proposals. Outline draft regulations have also been published, although it is not yet clear when these will be finalised and come into force. We report below on the new guidance and the response to the Annual Reporting Consultation below.

Employers

New guidance

The guidance is written in simple terms and provides a basic overview of the meaning of whistleblowing and the employer's responsibilities. A key theme highlighted throughout the guidance is the need for an internal whistleblowing policy which will help to demonstrate an employer's commitment to listening to the concerns of its workers. It is acknowledged that there is no "one-size-fits-all" policy and some employers will prefer to have a standalone policy, whilst others may prefer to incorporate it into a code of ethics or local procedures relevant to specific business units. A bullet point list of items to include in the policy is provided in the guidance.

The guidance also recommends that employers communicate and promote the existence of whistleblowing policies to workers e.g. via an intranet or staff handbook. Other ideas for promoting the policy include: holding a staff meeting to discuss the policy; appointing a whistleblowing champion to drive the commitment to valuing whistleblowing; and using promotional posters around the building.

The guidance offers a number of good practice recommendations on how employers should deal with disclosures including: having a facility for anonymous reporting; providing the whistleblower with access to mentoring, advice and counselling services; preserving confidentiality where possible; holding a meeting with the whistleblower; and conducting a formal investigation if required. Emphasis is also placed on the need to explain the procedures to the whistleblower and to manage their expectation as to the timing and level of feedback they will receive about how the disclosure has been dealt with.

Other recommended steps for employers are:

  • Recognising that workers are "valuable eyes and ears": this is important because the information that workers may uncover could prevent wrongdoing which may harm an organisation or its workers.
  • Getting the right culture: it is highlighted that the two main barriers whistleblowers face are a fear of reprisal and that no action will be taken if they make the decision to blow the whistle. Accordingly, the most important step for employers is to ensure that staff can approach management and that it is demonstrated that such disclosures are welcomed and encouraged.
  • Training and support: employers should implement training, mentoring, advice and other support systems for workers. The guidance suggests that training be provided to all staff on the key arrangements of the policy, with additional (and regular) training for those with whistleblowing responsibilities such as managers or designated contacts.
  • Being able to respond: employers should investigate disclosures promptly and provide feedback to the whistleblower. It is recommended that a least one senior member of staff is given as a point of contact for whistleblowers.
  • Better control: by embracing whistleblowing as an important source of information, managers will have better information to make decisions and control risk.
  • Resolving the wrongdoing quickly: dealing with whistleblowing disclosures internally allows employers to act promptly and put right whatever wrongdoing is found.

New Code of Practice

The Code of Practice (Code) sets out a list of best practice steps for employers, reiterating the themes addressed in the employer guidance. In summary, the Code recommends that employers:

  • Put in place a whistleblowing policy which is accessible and communicated to all staff.
  • Offer training to all staff on whistleblowing and to managers on how to deal with disclosures.
  • Create an open culture which demonstrates support for whistleblowers and no tolerance for any detrimental treatment towards whistlelblowers.
  • Identify the person/s to whom disclosures should be made.
  • Confirm that settlement agreements will not prevent whistleblowing disclosures.
  • Deal with disclosures fairly, consistently, professionally and confidentially.
  • Provide support and feedback to the whistleblower.

Regulators

New guidance

The guidance is designed to help prescribed persons (commonly known as regulators) understand the role and how this fits with their statutory functions beyond the whistleblowing legislation. The Public Interest Disclosure (Prescribed Persons) Order 2014 sets out the list of over 60 organisations and individuals that a worker may approach outside their workplace to report suspected wrongdoing.

The guidance explains the purpose of the regulator is to provide the worker with a mechanism to make their whistleblowing disclosure to an independent body. It also clarifies the circumstances in which the worker will retain the same employment rights as if they had made the disclosure internally. The guidance recommends that regulators decide whether they limit their role to the receipt of protected disclosures only or whether they will accept a wider range of non-protected disclosures.

It is explained that once a disclosure has been made to the regulator it is for the regulator to manage the initial contact with the whistleblower and take a decision about what further information or action is required. Regulators should have a set of policies and procedures to ensure consistency of treatment. Beyond the whistleblowing legislation, regulators may be able to consider a disclosure and make recommendations to the employer on how to rectify the problems found. Depending on their statutory powers, the regulator may also be able to take enforcement action where they find evidence of wrongdoing.

Emphasis is also placed on how regulators should manage a whistleblower's expectations and how regulators can promote best practice amongst the organisations they oversee.

New duty to report annually

The response to the Annual Reporting Consultation confirms that there was general support from respondents for a new duty for regulators to report annually. It is considered that increased transparency on how disclosures are handled will drive up standards amongst regulators and improve confidence amongst whistleblowers that their concerns are being addressed.

The responses have led the Government to conclude that the regulations governing annual reporting should not be too prescriptive or onerous and retain a degree of flexibility to accommodate the varying roles and remits of the different regulators. In particular, regulators will not be required to determine whether or not a disclosure is a public interest disclosure. Instead, the regulations will prescribe that the reports need only contain limited information, with the option for regulators to publish additional information if they wish. However, the reports must go beyond pure statistics and will need to include an accompanying narrative to add value.

Importantly, the reports will not reveal the identity of either the whistleblower or the employer: this was identified as a "fundamental concern" of respondents to the consultation.

An outline draft of The Prescribed Persons (Report on Disclosures of Information) Regulations 2015 is appended to the response. However, these regulations will not come into force before the General Election.

Comment

Employer should familiarise themselves with the new guidance and Code and take appropriate steps to comply with the recommendations, focusing on the need for a well-communicated policy, clear reporting procedures and appropriate training. Although the recommendations in the guidance and Code are non-statutory, they represent best practice standards for employers. A failure to meet those standards is likely to be capitalised on by a claimant in any future whistleblowing dispute.

Guidance for Employers and Code of Practice

Prescribed Person Guidance

Prescribed Bodies: Annual Reporting Requirements on Whistleblowing – Government Response

Find a Member

View or print a complete ELA member list »

Client Successes

Altra Industrial Motion Inc.

Altra Industrial Motion Inc. has multiple locations in the U.S., as well as Central America, Europe, and Asia. The Employment Law Alliance has proved to be a great asset in assisting us in dealing with employment issues and matters in such diverse venues as Mexico, Australia, and Spain. We have obtained excellent results using the ELA network for matters ranging from a multi-state review of employment policies to assisting with individual employment issues in a variety of foreign jurisdictions.

In one instance, we were faced with an employment dispute with a former associate in Mexico that had the potential for substantial economic exposure. The matter had been pending for over a year, and we were not confident in the employment advice we had been receiving. I obtained a referral to the ELA counsel in Mexico, who was able to obtain a favorable resolution of the dispute in only a few days. Based on our experiences with the ELA, we would not hesitate to use its many resources for future employment law needs.

American University in Bulgaria

In my career I have been a practicing attorney, counsel to the Governor of Maine, and CEO of a major public utility. I have worked with many lawyers in many settings. When the American University in Bulgaria needed help with employment litigation in federal court in Syracuse, New York, we turned to Pierce Atwood, the ELA member we knew and trusted in Maine, for a referral. We were extremely pleased with the responsiveness and high quality of service we received from Bond Schoeneck & King, the ELA's firm in upstate New York. I would not hesitate to recommend the ELA to any employer.

David T. Flanagan
Member of Board of Trustees 

Arcata Associates

I really enjoyed the Conducting an Effective Internal Investigation in the United States webinar.  We are in the midst of a rather delicate employee relations issue in California right now and the discussion helped me tremendously.  It also reinforced things that you tend to forget if you don't do these investigations frequently.  So, many, many thanks to the Employment Law Alliance for putting that webinar together.  It was extremely beneficial.

Lynn Clayton
Vice President, Human Resources

Barrett Business Services, Inc.

I recently participated in the ELA-sponsored webinar on the Employee Free Choice Act.  I was most impressed with that presentation.  It was extremely helpful and very worthwhile.  I have also been utilizing the ELA's online Global Employer Handbook.  This compliance tool is absolutely terrific. 

I am familiar with several other products that purport to provide up-to- date employment law information and I believe that this resource is superior to other similar compliance manuals.  I am delighted that the ELA provides this free to its members' clients.

Boyd Coffee Company

Employment Law Alliance (ELA) has provided Boyd Coffee Company with a highly valued connection to resources, important information and learning. With complex operations and employees working in approximately 20 states, we are continually striving to keep abreast of specific state laws, many of which vary from state to state. We have participated in the ELA web seminars and have found the content very useful. We appreciate the ease, cost effectiveness and quality of the content and presenters offered by these web seminars.  The Global Employer Handbook has provided our company with a very helpful overview of legal issues in the various states in which we operate, and the network of attorneys has helped us manage issues that have arisen in states other than where our Roastery and corporate headquarters are located in Portland, Oregon.

Capgemini Outsourcing Services GmbH

As an international operating outsourcing and consulting supplier Capgemini has used firms of the Employment Law Alliance in Central Europe. We were always highly satisfied with the quality of employment law advice and the responsiveness. I can really recommend the ELA lawyers.

Hirschfeld Kraemer

Stephen HirschfeldAs an employment lawyer based in San Francisco, I work closely with high tech clients with operations around the globe. Last year, one of my clients needed to implement a workforce reduction in a dozen countries simultaneously. And they gave me 48 hours to accomplish this. I don't know how I could have pulled this off without the resources of the ELA. I don't know of any single law firm that could have made this happen. My client received all of the help they needed in a timely fashion and on a cost effective basis.

Stephen J. Hirschfeld
Partner 

Hollywood Entertainment Corporation

As the Vice President for Litigation & Associate General Counsel for my company, I need to ensure that we have a team of top-notch employment lawyers in place in every jurisdiction where we do business. And I want to be confident that those lawyers know our business so they don't have to reinvent the wheel when a new legal matter arises. With more than 3400 stores and 35,000 employees operating in all 50 U.S. states and across Canada, we rely on the ELA to partner with us to help accomplish our objectives. I have been delighted with the consistent high quality of the work performed by ELA lawyers. I encourage other in-house counsel to use their services, as well.

Ingram Micro

Ingram Micro is the world's largest technology distributor, providing sales, marketing, and logistics services for the IT industry around the globe. With over 13,000 employees working throughout the U.S. and in 35 international countries, we need employment lawyers who we can count on to ensure global legal compliance. Our experience with many multi-state and multi-national law firms is that their employment law services are not always a high priority for them, and many do not have experts in many of their offices. The ELA has assembled an excellent team of highly skilled employment lawyers, wherever and whenever I need them, and they have proven to be an invaluable resource to our company.

Konami Gaming

Our company, Konami Gaming, Inc., is growing rapidly in a very diverse and highly regulated industry. We are aggressively entering new markets outside the domestic U.S., including Canada and South America. I have had the recent opportunity to utilize the services provided by the ELA. The legal advice was both responsive and professional. Most of all, the entire process was seamless since our Nevada attorney coordinated the services and legal advice requested. I look forward to working with the ELA in the future, as it serves as a great resource to the legal community.

Jennifer Martinez
Vice President, Human Resources

Nikkiso Cryo, Inc.

Until recently, I was unaware of the ELA's existence. We have subsidiaries and affiliates throughout the United States, as well as in Asia, the Middle East and Europe. When a recent legal issue arose in Texas, our long-time Nevada counsel, who is a member of the ELA, suggested that this matter be handled by his ELA colleague in Dallas. We are very pleased with the quality and timeliness of services provided by that firm, and we are excited to now have the ELA as an important asset to help us address employment law issues worldwide.

Palm, Inc.

The ELA network has been immensely important to our company in helping us address an array of human resources challenges around the world. I strongly encourage H.R. executives who have employees located in many different jurisdictions to utilize the ELA's unparalleled expertise and geographic coverage.

Stacy Murphy
Former Senior Director of Human Resources

Rich Products

As the General Counsel for a company with 6,500 employees operating across the U.S. and in eight countries, it is critical that I have top quality lawyers on the ground where we do business. The ELA is an indispensable resource. It has taken the guesswork out of finding the best employment counsel wherever we have a problem.

Jill K. Bond
Senior Vice President/General Counsel, Shared Services and Benefits

Ricoh Americas Corporation

We have direct sales and service offices all over the U.S., but have not necessarily had the need in the past for assistance with legal work in every state where we have a business presence. From time to time, we suddenly find ourselves facing a legal issue in a state where we have no outside counsel relationship. It has been a real benefit to know that the ELA has assembled such an impressive team of experts throughout the U.S. and overseas.

A few years ago, we faced a very tough discrimination lawsuit in Mississippi. We had never had to retain a lawyer there before. I was absolutely delighted with the Mississippi ELA firm. We received an excellent result. They will no doubt handle all of our employment law matters in Mississippi in the future. I have also obtained the assistance of several other ELA firms around the U.S. and have received the same outstanding service. The ELA is a tremendous resource for our company.

Roberts-Gordon LLC

Our affiliated companies have used the Employment Law Alliance in connection with numerous acquisitions, and have always been extremely pleased with our ability to obtain the highest quality legal advice on due diligence issues from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. We have found the Employment Law Alliance firms to be not only first rate with respect to their legal advice but also responsive and timely in assisting us with federal and state law issues critical to our due diligence efforts. We consider the Employment Law Alliance to be an important part of our team.

Rockwell Collins, Inc.

We have partnered with many ELA firms on the development and execution of case management strategies with very positive results. We have been very pleased with the legal advice and counsel provided by the law firms we have utilized who are affiliated with the Employment Law Alliance. The ELA firms we have worked with are customer focused, responsive, and thorough in their approach to handling labor and employment law matters.

Elizabeth Daly
Assistant General Counsel

Sanmina-SCI

Sanmina-SCI has facilities strategically located in key regions throughout the world. Our customers expect that we will provide them with the highest quality and most sophisticated services in the marketplace. We have that same expectation for the lawyers with whom we do business. With operations in 17 countries, we need to be certain that we have a team of lawyers working together to address our employment law needs worldwide. The ELA has delivered exactly what it promised-- seamless and consistent high quality services delivered in each locale around the globe. It has quickly become a key asset for our human resources department.

Starwood

We own, manage, and franchise hotels throughout the U.S. and in more than 90 countries. With more than 145,000 employees worldwide, ensuring that we comply with the complex web of local labor and employment laws in every one of these jurisdictions is a daunting task. The Employment Law Alliance has served as an important resource for us and we have benefited greatly from its expertise and long reach. When a legal dispute or issue has arisen in some far-flung place, Employment Law Alliance lawyers have always provided responsive, practical, and cost-effective assistance.

Wilmington Trust Corporation

Wilmington Trust has used the ELA to locate firms in California, Washington State, Georgia, and Europe. Our experience with the ELA lawyers with whom we have worked has always been one of complete satisfaction and prompt, practical advice.

Michael A. DiGregorio
General Counsel