Blow The Whistle, Get Tossed: Handling Whistleblowers
July 2014
IN THIS ISSUE
— “Retaliation” Against Whistleblowers Raises Concerns
— How to Assist Whistleblowers In Assisting Your Investigation
GREETINGS!
Welcome to the July edition of our newsletter! in this issue, we’ll examine efforts to strengthen the whistleblower protections put in place in 2010, why advocates feel they need strengthening, and how to manage whistleblowers who can aid investigations.
“RETALIATION” AGAINST WHISTLEBLOWERS RAISES CONCERNS
When the Dodd-Frank financial industry reforms were signed into law in 2010, one provision was to create greater financial incentives for whistleblowers to come forward with information about fraud — and another provision was to put in place penalties for companies or executives that acted to discourage such behavior. While the former element is well underway, with tipsters receiving as much as 30 percent of any civil penalty paid as a result of their tips, the latter provision is still being bypassed, according to various advocacy groups.
Such groups point to reports — as yet unconfirmed — that some large multinational corporations have required employees to sign statements affirming that they would not report allegations of fraud uncovered at the company. Advocates have called for more stringent requirements concerning how employee confidentiality agreements must be worded, in order to preserve a whistleblower’s right to come forward.
HOW TO ASSIST WHISTLEBLOWERS IN ASSISTING YOUR INVESTIGATION
Tips can be a vital part of any investigation, whether an internal inquiry or acting as an outside consultant. While scrutiny of sources and information is as important as scrutiny of possible subjects of an investigation, certain steps can be taken to create a cooperative environment for obtaining information while maintaining impartiality during the investigation. For example, having a confidential source sign a nondisclosure agreement is always a good idea, and while an investigator can’t necessarily reciprocate by pledging not to share the information obtained (in the event it could lead to a criminal prosecution, for example), treating the source in a respectful manner and keeping the parties informed to a minimum of relevant parties will build trust.
As with any source of information, it is important to vet the source’s credibility as well as that of the information itself. But when properly handled and carefully scrutinized,a source’s information can prove to be an essential part of an investigation, provided that such sources feel able to share pertinent information.