The Fourth District Court of Appeal made a decision that expands the protection for whistle-blowers under the Public Sector Whistle-Blower’s Act. This means that more people are now protected if they report wrongdoing, and they can do so in different ways. The law protects employees who report violations of the law or other serious problems at their workplace to the boss or to a government agency. If an employee is punished for making such a report, they can sue their employer. However, the report has to be about very serious things, like dangerous conditions or wasting public money. The report also has to be made to the right person or agency, like the boss or a government office that can investigate. If an employee is asked to help with an investigation and talks about the problems during the investigation, they are also protected. This law is to encourage employees to report serious problems without fear of getting in trouble. If you want to report wrongdoing by a local government, you need to tell someone who has the power to investigate and fix the problem. In a court case called Rustowicz, a person was protected under the law for reporting to their supervisor and the board about a CEO’s spending. The court said that the person had made a protected disclosure to an appropriate government official. The court also said that the person showed enough evidence that the decision maker knew about their report when they were let go from their job. The court rejected the employer’s argument that their firing was for another reason. This court decision is important because it sets a standard for who counts as an appropriate local official when reporting government wrongdoing. Other courts have to follow this decision unless a higher court says otherwise. If an employee complains or gives information during an investigation, employers should take it seriously and investigate it separately. If they don’t, they could face legal trouble. If an employee’s complaint could be protected by the law, any punishment against the employee has to be fair. Employers should keep good records of their decisions. For complaints about a local government, employers need to be careful about who counts as a “local official” based on the Rustowicz case and other similar cases. The court is interpreting retaliation claims more broadly, even though it’s not clear if that’s what the legislature meant. Not every statement is protected by the law, and an agency includes any level of government. The law also defines who is considered an employee, and there is an administrative process for employees to file complaints. When someone believes they were discriminated against at work, they can file a complaint. The employer has to prove they had a good reason for their actions, and then the employee has a chance to prove it was just an excuse. There are specific people within local government that can receive and investigate these complaints. If an employee complains to the right person, they are protected from retaliation. These references are about cases where employees reported problems at work, and whether they told the right people to be protected under the law. In some cases, the employees didn’t identify the right person to report to, so their complaints weren’t legally protected. In other cases, the employees did report to the right people, so their complaints were legally protected. The plaintiff in Rustowicz sued their employer under the Florida Civil Rights Act for whistleblower retaliation. The court ruled in favor of the employer because the plaintiff didn’t file a written complaint, but the court said they didn’t have to. The plaintiff’s job involved investigating, and the court said participating in an investigation counts as protected activity. The court cited previous cases to show that there was enough evidence of a connection between the employee’s complaint and her getting in trouble at work. They also mentioned that the decisions of lower courts in Florida are important unless the Florida Supreme Court says otherwise. And when a federal court has to apply state law, they have to follow the decisions of the state’s intermediate courts unless there’s a good reason not to. There was also a note that the court didn’t talk about whether the employee’s complaint was related to her job or not. Lindsey L. Dunn is a lawyer who helps employers with labor and employment issues. She works for a law firm and has a lot of experience in this area.
Source: https://www.floridabar.org/the-florida-bar-journal/public-whistle-blowers-act-the-fourth-district-court-of-appeal-continues-to-follow-trend-in-expanding-scope-of-retaliation-claims/
Leave a Reply