Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998

Last updated

Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998
Act of Parliament
Royal Coat of Arms of the United Kingdom (Variant 1, 2022).svg
Parliament of the United Kingdom
Long title An Act to protect individuals who make certain disclosures of information in the public interest; to allow such individuals to bring action in respect of victimisation; and for connected purposes
Citation 1998 c. 23
Introduced by Richard Shepherd
Territorial extent 
Dates
Royal assent 2 July 1998
Commencement 2 July 1999
Other legislation
Amended by Employment Relations Act 1999
Police Reform Act 2002
Status: Amended
Text of statute as originally enacted

The Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998 (c. 23) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that protects whistleblowers from detrimental treatment by their employer. Influenced by various financial scandals and accidents, along with the report of the Committee on Standards in Public Life, the bill was introduced to Parliament by Richard Shepherd and given government support, on the condition that it become an amendment to the Employment Rights Act 1996. After receiving the Royal Assent on 2 July 1998, the Act came into force on 2 July 1999. It protects employees who make disclosures of certain types of information, including evidence of illegal activity or damage to the environment, from retribution from their employers, such as dismissal or being passed over for promotion. In cases where such retribution takes place the employee may bring a case before an employment tribunal, which can award compensation.

Contents

As a result of the Act, many more employers have instituted internal whistleblowing procedures, although only 38 percent of individuals surveyed worked for a company with such procedures in place [ citation needed ]. The Act has been criticised for failing to force employers to institute such a policy, containing no provisions preventing the "blacklisting" of employees who make such disclosures, and failing to protect the employee from libel proceedings should their allegation turn out to be false.

Under the Act a non-disclosure agreement (NDA) between an employer and employee, often a condition of compensation for loss of employment for some reason, does not remove a worker’s right to make a protected disclosure, i.e. to blow the whistle. [1] [2] In 2019 a consultation was held on adding limitations on confidentiality clauses, following evidence that some employers used confidentiality clauses to intimidate victims of harassment or discrimination into silence, suggesting that the worker did not have the right to blow the whistle, take a matter to a tribunal, or even discuss with people such as the police, a doctor, or a therapist. [1]

Background

Prior to the 1998 Act, whistleblowers in the United Kingdom had no protection against being dismissed by their employer. Although they could avoid being sued for breach of confidence thanks to a public interest defence, that did not prevent subtle or open victimisation in the workplace, including disciplinary action, dismissal, [3] failure to gain promotion or a pay rise. [4] During the early to mid-1990s, interest in whistleblower protection grew, partially because of a series of financial scandals and health and safety accidents, which investigations into showed could have been prevented if employees had been permitted to voice their concerns, [5] and partially because of the work of the Committee on Standards in Public Life. [6]

In 1995 and 1996, two private member's bills dealing with whistleblowers were introduced to Parliament, by Tony Wright and Don Touhig respectively, but both efforts fell through. When Richard Shepherd proposed a similar bill, however, he got government support for it on the condition that it be an amendment to the Employment Rights Act 1996 rather than a new area of law in its own right. [7] Public Concern at Work, a UK-based whistleblowers charity, was involved in the drafting and consultation stages of the bill. [8] The case of Graham Pink added to the pressure to introduce whistleblower protection legislation. [9]

The Public Interest Disclosure Bill was introduced to the House of Commons by Shepherd in 1997, and given its second reading on 12 December before being sent to a committee. [10] After being passed by the Commons it moved to the House of Lords on 27 April 1998, [11] and was passed on 29 June, [12] receiving the Royal Assent on 2 July and becoming the Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998. [13] Originally scheduled to come into force on 1 January 1999, [6] the Act instead became applicable law on 2 July. [14]

Contents

Section 1 of the Act inserts sections 43A to L into the Employment Rights Act 1996, titled "Protected Disclosures". It provides that a disclosure which the whistleblower makes to their employer, a "prescribed person", in the course of seeking legal advice, Ministers of the Crown, individuals appointed by the Secretary of State for that purpose, or, in limited circumstances, "any other person", is protected. In addition, the disclosure must be one which the whistleblower "reasonably believes" shows a criminal offence, a failure to comply with legal obligations, a miscarriage of justice, danger to the health and safety of employees, damage to the environment, or the hiding of information which would show any of the above actions. These disclosures do not have to be of confidential information, and this section does not abolish the public interest defence; in addition, it can be the disclosure of information about actions which have already occurred, are occurring, or could occur in the future. [6] In Miklaszewicz v Stolt Offshore Ltd , [15] the Employment Appeal Tribunal confirmed that the disclosure does not have to have been made after the Act came into force; it is sufficient for the dismissal or other persecution by the employer to have happened after that time. [16]

The list of "prescribed persons" is found in the Public Interest Disclosure (Prescribed Persons) Order 1999, [17] and includes only official bodies; the Health and Safety Executive, the Data Protection Registrar, the Certification Officer, the Environment Agency and the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry. An employee will be protected if he "makes a disclosure in good faith" to one of these people, and "reasonably believes that the relevant failure...is a matter in respect of which the person is prescribed and the information is substantially true". [18] Other prescribed persons include the Scottish Environment Protection Agency, in relation to "acts or omissions which have an actual or potential effect on the environment... including those relating to pollution". [19]

If an employee makes such a disclosure, Section 2 inserts a new Section 47B, providing that the employee shall suffer no detriment in their employment as a result. That includes both negative actions and the absence of action and so covers discipline, dismissal, or failing to gain a pay rise or access to facilities which would otherwise have been provided. [20] If an employee suffers a detriment, he is permitted to make a complaint before an employment tribunal under Section 3. In front of an employment tribunal, the law is amended in Sections 4 and 5 to provide compensation, and to reverse the burden of proof. If an employee has been dismissed for making a protected disclosure, this dismissal is automatically considered unfair. Similarly, under Section 6, an employee cannot be given priority when he discusses redundancies simply because he made such a disclosure. These sections take into account Section 7, which notes that there is no requirement of age or length of employment before they come into effect. [21]

Under Section 8, the Secretary of State could pass a statutory instrument setting out the rules and limits surrounding compensation for the employee's dismissal after making a protected disclosure; until this is done, Section 9 provided interim remedies, which were the same as in other cases of unfair dismissal. The Secretary of State passed such an instrument, the Public Interest Disclosure (Compensation) Regulations 1999, [18] but Section 8 has now been repealed under Section 44 of the Employment Relations Act 1999. [22] Under Section 10, the Act applies to crown servants, excepting under Section 11, those who are employees of MI5, MI6 or GCHQ. The Act does exclude, in Sections 12 and 13, serving police officers and those employed outside the United Kingdom. [21]

Assessment and impact

Terry Corbin, writing in the Criminal Law and Justice Weekly, notes that the result of the Act has been that many more employers have developed internal processes for reporting issues, partially because desire to fix problems before they become publicly reported and partially because if employees choose not to use those processes and instead act under the 1998 Act, there is a greater chance that the employer can depict their behaviour as "unreasonable". [23] However, a survey done by Public Concern At Work showed that in 2010, only 38 percent of those surveyed worked for companies with whistleblowing policies in place, and only 23 percent knew that legal protection for whistleblowers existed. The number of cases brought by whistleblowers to employment tribunals has increased more than tenfold, from 157 in 1999/2000 to 1,761 in 2008/9. [24]

David Lewis, writing in the Industrial Law Journal, highlights what he perceives as weaknesses in the legislation. Firstly, it does not force employers to make a policy relating to disclosures. Secondly, it does not prevent employers from "blacklisting" and refusing to hire those who are known within the industry to have made disclosures in previous jobs. The complexity of the law was also criticised, as was the fact that if such a disclosure turns out to be incorrect, the employee may be sued for libel by his employer. [25] Volunteers and self-employed people are not covered, and the same goes for those who, in disclosing the information, commit a criminal offence. [26] Also, the law does not make any provision for psychological harm caused by whistleblowing, which research shows is common. [27]

See also

Related Research Articles

Whistleblowing is the activity of a person, often an employee, revealing information about activity within a private or public organization that is deemed illegal, immoral, illicit, unsafe or fraudulent. Whistleblowers can use a variety of internal or external channels to communicate information or allegations. Over 83% of whistleblowers report internally to a supervisor, human resources, compliance, or a neutral third party within the company, hoping that the company will address and correct the issues. A whistleblower can also bring allegations to light by communicating with external entities, such as the media, government, or law enforcement. Some countries legislate as to what constitutes a protected disclosure, and the permissible methods of presenting a disclosure. Whistleblowing can occur in the private sector or the public sector.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United Kingdom labour law</span> Rights of workers, unions, and duties of employers in the UK

United Kingdom labour law regulates the relations between workers, employers and trade unions. People at work in the UK have a minimum set of employment rights, from Acts of Parliament, Regulations, common law and equity. This includes the right to a minimum wage of £10.42 for over-23-year-olds from April 2023 under the National Minimum Wage Act 1998. The Working Time Regulations 1998 give the right to 28 days paid holidays, breaks from work, and attempt to limit long working hours. The Employment Rights Act 1996 gives the right to leave for child care, and the right to request flexible working patterns. The Pensions Act 2008 gives the right to be automatically enrolled in a basic occupational pension, whose funds must be protected according to the Pensions Act 1995. Workers must be able to vote for trustees of their occupational pensions under the Pensions Act 2004. In some enterprises, such as universities or NHS foundation trusts, staff can vote for the directors of the organisation. In enterprises with over 50 staff, workers must be negotiated with, with a view to agreement on any contract or workplace organisation changes, major economic developments or difficulties. The UK Corporate Governance Code recommends worker involvement in voting for a listed company's board of directors but does not yet follow international standards in protecting the right to vote in law. Collective bargaining, between democratically organised trade unions and the enterprise's management, has been seen as a "single channel" for individual workers to counteract the employer's abuse of power when it dismisses staff or fix the terms of work. Collective agreements are ultimately backed up by a trade union's right to strike: a fundamental requirement of democratic society in international law. Under the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 strike action is protected when it is "in contemplation or furtherance of a trade dispute".

In employment law, constructive dismissal, also called constructive discharge or constructive termination, occurs when an employee resigns as a result of the employer creating a hostile work environment. Since the resignation was not truly voluntary, it is, in effect, a termination. For example, when an employer places extraordinary and unreasonable work demands on an employee to obtain their resignation, this can constitute a constructive dismissal.

Unfair dismissal in the United Kingdom is the part of UK labour law that requires fair, just and reasonable treatment by employers in cases where a person's job could be terminated. The Employment Rights Act 1996 regulates this by saying that employees are entitled to a fair reason before being dismissed, based on their capability to do the job, their conduct, whether their position is economically redundant, on grounds of a statute, or some other substantial reason. It is automatically unfair for an employer to dismiss an employee, regardless of length of service, for becoming pregnant, or for having previously asserted certain specified employment rights. Otherwise, an employee must have worked for two years. This means an employer only terminates an employee's job lawfully if the employer follows a fair procedure, acts reasonably and has a fair reason.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States Office of Special Counsel</span> Investigative and prosecutorial agency

The United States Office of Special Counsel (OSC) is a permanent independent federal investigative and prosecutorial agency whose basic legislative authority comes from four federal statutes: the Civil Service Reform Act, the Whistleblower Protection Act, the Hatch Act, and the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA). OSC's primary mission is the safeguarding of the merit system in federal employment by protecting employees and applicants from prohibited personnel practices (PPPs), especially reprisal for "whistleblowing." The agency also operates a secure channel for federal whistleblower disclosures of violations of law, rule, or regulation; gross mismanagement; gross waste of funds; abuse of authority; and substantial and specific danger to public health and safety. In addition, OSC issues advice on the Hatch Act and enforces its restrictions on partisan political activity by government employees. Finally, OSC protects the civilian employment and reemployment rights of military service members under USERRA. OSC has around 140 staff, and the Special Counsel is an ex officio member of Council of Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency (CIGIE), an association of inspectors general charged with the regulation of good governance within the federal government.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Employment Relations Act 1999</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Employment Relations Act 1999 is an Act of Parliament of the United Kingdom. It made significant amendments in UK labour law to the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Employment Rights Act 1996</span> United Kingdom Law

The Employment Rights Act 1996 is a United Kingdom Act of Parliament passed by the Conservative government to codify existing law on individual rights in UK labour law.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Whistleblower Protection Act</span> US law regarding protection of federal whistleblowers

The Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989, 5 U.S.C. 2302(b)(8)-(9), Pub.L. 101-12 as amended, is a United States federal law that protects federal whistleblowers who work for the government and report the possible existence of an activity constituting a violation of law, rules, or regulations, or mismanagement, gross waste of funds, abuse of authority or a substantial and specific danger to public health and safety. A federal agency violates the Whistleblower Protection Act if agency authorities take retaliatory personnel action against any employee or applicant because of disclosure of information by that employee or applicant.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Employment Relations Act 2000</span> Statute of the Parliament of New Zealand

The New Zealand Employment Relations Act 2000 is a statute of the Parliament of New Zealand. It was substantially amended by the Employment Relations Amendment Act 2001 and by the ERAA 2004.

The Federal Accountability Initiative for Reform (FAIR) was a Canadian public interest organization and registered charity whose purpose was to support legislation and management practices that protect whistleblowers.

The Public Servants Disclosure Protection Act came into force in Canada on April 15, 2007. The Act creates two distinct processes: a disclosure process and a reprisal complaints process. It also creates two new bodies: the Office of the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner (PSIC) and the Public Servants Disclosure Protection Tribunal.

<i>Huffman v. Office of Personnel Management</i>

Huffman v. Office of Personnel Management, 263 F.3d 1341 is a decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit addressing a two decade-old conflict between the United States Congress and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit over the depth of whistleblower protection available to federal civilian employees covered by the Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989. The discourse revolves around the meaning of the word 'any'.

In labour law, unfair dismissal is an act of employment termination made without good reason or contrary to the country's specific legislation.

Buchan and Ivey v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry [1997] IRLR 80 is a UK insolvency law and labour law case, concerning the protection of employees' salaries on their employer's insolvency.

The Defense Intelligence Community Whistleblower Program (DICWP) is a sub-mission of the Department of Defense Whistleblower Program. In administering the DICWP, the Office of the Inspector General, U.S. Department of Defense (DoDIG) balances the competing national security and separation of powers interests raised by whistleblowing within the Defense Intelligence Community.The DoDIG provides a safe, authorized conduit for Defense Department whistleblowers to disclose classified information. The Inspector General also has authority to investigate whistleblowing reprisal allegations filed by civilian and military members of the Defense Intelligence Community. It therefore accepts the disclosures and provides source protection for those providing the information. The Department of Defense funds and supervises much of the Republic's intelligence gathering. DoD IG accordingly provides protection to a large number of civilian and military intelligence personnel.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Whistleblower protection in the United States</span>

A whistleblower is a person who exposes any kind of information or activity that is deemed illegal, unethical, or not correct within an organization that is either private or public. The Whistleblower Protection Act was made into federal law in the United States in 1989.

South African labour law regulates the relationship between employers, employees and trade unions in the Republic of South Africa.

In law, wrongful dismissal, also called wrongful termination or wrongful discharge, is a situation in which an employee's contract of employment has been terminated by the employer, where the termination breaches one or more terms of the contract of employment, or a statute provision or rule in employment law. Laws governing wrongful dismissal vary according to the terms of the employment contract, as well as under the laws and public policies of the jurisdiction.

The law for workplace bullying is given below for each country in detail. Further European countries with concrete antibullying legislation are Belgium, France, and The Netherlands.

Whistleblower protection in Australia is offered for certain disclosures under a patchwork of laws at both federal and state level. Eligibility for protection depends on the requirements of the applicable law and the subject matter of the disclosure. Not all disclosures are protected by law in Australia. At federal level, whistleblowers face potential imprisonment for making disclosures about certain subjects, including national security and immigration matters.

References

  1. 1 2 "Consultation on Confidentiality Clauses" (PDF). UK Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy . March 2019.
  2. ↑ Rianna Croxford (17 April 2019). "UK universities face 'gagging order' criticism". BBC News.
  3. ↑ Gunasekara (2003) p.43
  4. ↑ "Whistleblowers Find Protection In New Act". Local Government Chronicle. 3 March 1999.
  5. ↑ Gunasekara (2003) p.41
  6. 1 2 3 Lewis (1998) p.325
  7. ↑ Lewis (2005) p.239
  8. ↑ Calland and Dehn (eds) (2004) Whistleblowing Around the World: Law, Culture and Practice, ODAC, PCaW and the British Council, p. 105
  9. ↑ "Why whistleblowers voices must continue to be heard". Guardian. 27 November 2013. Retrieved 12 January 2015.
  10. ↑ "PUBLIC INTEREST DISCLOSURE BILL". Parliamentary Debates (Hansard) . 12 December 1997. Retrieved 5 February 2011.
  11. ↑ "Public Interest Disclosure Bill". Parliamentary Debates (Hansard) . 27 April 1998. Retrieved 5 February 2011.
  12. ↑ "Public Interest Disclosure Bill". Parliamentary Debates (Hansard) . 29 June 1998. Retrieved 5 February 2011.
  13. ↑ "Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998". UK Statute Law Database . Retrieved 5 February 2011.
  14. ↑ "UK: The Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998 comes into force". Mondaq Business Briefing. Macfarlanes, UK. 21 July 1999.
  15. ↑ [2001] IRLR 656(EAT)
  16. ↑ "Miklaszewicz v Stolt Offshore Ltd 2002 S.L.T. 103 (Ex Div)". Employment Law Bulletin. Sweet & Maxwell. 47 (2). 2002. ISSN   1352-2159.
  17. ↑ Lewis (2005) p.125
  18. 1 2 Craig (1999) p.2
  19. ↑ Craig (1999) p.3
  20. ↑ Lewis (1998) p.328
  21. 1 2 Lewis (1998) p.329
  22. ↑ "Lexis@Library:". LexisNexis. Retrieved 5 February 2011.
  23. ↑ Corbitt (2003) p.3
  24. ↑ Lewis (2010) p.1
  25. ↑ Lewis (1998) p.330
  26. ↑ Gobert (2000) p.38
  27. ↑ Gobert (2000) p.46

Bibliography

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.