Corporate Retaliation Against Whistleblowers: History, Laws & Real-World

In the corporate world, whistle blowing is most times seen as the enemy. The level of corruption going on in the corporate sector makes whistleblowers a target when they speak up at the sight of injustice, unfairness, or some corrupt practices that they know harm society. They do this by exposing what is done wrongly in secret until it reaches the eyes and ears of those authorised to do something about it.

Corporate retaliation against whistleblowers refers to actions taken by organizations to punish employees who expose illegal, unethical, or harmful practices. These retaliations may include job termination, demotion, blacklisting, defamation, or legal intimidation. Throughout history, many whistleblowers have faced professional and personal consequences after revealing corruption. However, laws such as the Whistleblower Protection Act and Sarbanes-Oxley Act were introduced to protect individuals who report corporate misconduct and encourage transparency in organizations.

The dark side of corporate retaliation against whistleblowers isn’t about exposing corruption, but about how whistleblowers themselves are received afterwards. There are so many risks and retaliations that come with whistleblowing, and what whistleblowers face in the hands of corporations is enough to make one keep quiet in fear.

History has shown how these whistleblower retaliation, and there would be a proper examination of the legal protections available, the media’s role in these situations, and why all of this history matters.

Historical Retaliation Patterns 

There have been patterns that follow the retaliation experienced by whistleblowers from corporations and large organisations. These patterns show that whenever corporate retaliation against whistleblowers occurs by a corporate organisation, it is not something that’s accidental. Also, the fact that it can even be called a pattern means that it is done repeatedly and is something that isn’t rare amongst corporations.

These patterns include:

Effect on Job: The most likely thing for whistleblowers to face, especially when it’s in the company that they work for, is either demotion, suspension, or even the immediate loss of their job. That’s a major form of retaliation because they know it surely affects the whistleblower, more like a way for them to pay for their integrity.

Whistleblowers often face termination a lot. Take, for example, Frank Serpico from the NYPD, who lost his job after he exposed the high level of corruption that takes place in the police. This job termination is often a way to keep their mouths shut and silence their voice.

Blacklisting: Another common act of retaliation observed from corporate organisations against whistleblowers is the blacklisting of these individuals from industries. As if the termination of jobs isn’t enough, they are then further unable to get any jobs in the future because the state of being blacklisted automatically disqualifies them.

Daniel Ellsberg from the Pentagon Papers was blacklisted from the government after his whistleblowing act of leaking secrets in relation to the 1971 Vietnam War. This led to the end of his career and, of course, caused a financial strain on him.

Defamation: This happens in various ways. The corporations often, in an act to save face, would defame the whistleblower in question, painting them as bad or lacking proper performance. The defamation of character influences how people perceive them and leads to public discredit.

Jeffrey Wigand, who exposed the Brown and Williamson tobacco company, was faced with defamation, where the company manufactured stories of domestic abuse, false credentials, and much more just to paint him badly.

Legal Protection

The Law has put in place protection Acts for whistleblowers. These rules protect Whistleblowers from retaliation, such as loss of jobs, harassment, defamation, and any other form of unfair treatment that might stop other whistleblowers from speaking up. These Legal Protection Policies take the form of the following:

1989 Whistleblower Protection Act: This act protects whistleblowers who expose corrupt practices done by the government. It protects the job, safety, and properties of the federal employees when they expose things like embezzling of public funds, endangering the public health and safety of citizens, and so much more.

The 2002 Sarbanes-Oxley Act: This particular legal act protects employees of companies that trade and deal with contractors and subcontractors. Whistleblowers are protected through this act when they report any form of fraud, money laundering, etc. This act protects them from loss and ensures their job and safety are guaranteed.

The 1863 False Claims Act: This act doesn’t just protect internal employees. This act goes further to protect individuals who take the bold step to report corrupt acts and practices of the federal government that they are sure of. The False Claims Act not only protects but also provides. Whistleblowers, when finally investigated and claims are proven to be true, they get rewarded financially for their act.

Agencies to Report 

When whistleblowing takes place against corrupt activities, whistleblowers are expected to report to agencies that are made to protect them.

These agencies protect and back them up from corporate retaliation, thereby enforcing the safety acts. They are:

OSHA – Occupational Safety and Health Administration.

WHD – Wage and Hour Division

OFCCP – Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs

VETS – Veterans Employment and Training Services

MSHA – Mine Safety and Health Administration 

These agencies carry out the duties of handling retaliation cases when filed after whistleblowing for the protection and safety of the whistleblower.

Media’s Role

Holding corporations accountable and exposing corrupt practices is not something whistleblowers can do on their own. In fact, when whistleblowers speak up, they need a body to amplify their voice while still keeping them anonymous. This is where the media comes in.

Also, when investigative journalism needs sources to validate and verify their existing information, the whistleblowers come in handy. Whistleblowing and the media work hand in hand towards achieving the same goal. However, the role of the media in this case is:

Amplify the Voice of the Whistleblowers: Without the aid of the media, the claims, reports, and voices of the whistleblowers might as well never be heard. This is where the media plays the role of amplifiers and makes coverage of these acts, which will then be passed to the general public for consumption.

Another reason why Whistleblowers need the media to amplify their voice is effectiveness. The whistleblower might just be the right source and have all the information an investigative journalist might need to carry out deep research, but they might have to figure out how to relate it to the public in an understandable way. When information is not clearly understood, it misses the goal of effectiveness.

Protecting the Whistleblowers: Journalists cannot protect whistleblowers in the way that other organisations like OSHA, WHD, and all other organizational agencies do. The media protects the whistleblowers, who are, in this case, their sources, by keeping them anonymous.

Nothing keeps a whistleblower protected like anonymity, where the exposure is there for the whole world to see, but the identity of the source remains unknown. This is super doable in this digital era due to apps that can blur faces even when on video record or special devices that can change the voice of the speaker so they are not traced to anyone.

Risks Whistleblowers Face

Whistle blowers face a lot of risks, which, when not properly backed legally, can lead to other whistle blowers or intending whistle blowers not speaking up. Some of these risks include:

Financial Toll: Most times, whistleblowers face a lot of financial tolls. This is not because their money was seized, but because when they lose their jobs, or are blacklisted and have to face lengthy court cases as a result, a lot of finances get involved. There are a lot of financial implications that come with being a whistleblower, which is the reason why legal protection is needed.

These patterns or foreseen circumstances of financial toll on whistleblowers can sometimes shut the mouths of others or stop them from speaking up. This is because, based on past experience witnessed or personally observed, the risk isn’t something they are ready for. So in order to save their jobs and finances, they decided not to speak up.

Public Humiliation : One of the risks of whistleblowing is the public humiliation that comes with it, especially when there hasn’t been full proof or evidence provided. Most times benefactors of corruption ensure one’s life is being made miserable by sending constant attacks.

These public humiliation practices transcend into private stress and take a toll on the whistleblower. These said whistleblowers cannot live freely anymore, there’s no proper rules put in place to protect them and by extension face alot of shame and scrutiny.

Societal Consequences

When corporations retaliate against whistleblowers, it comes with a lot of consequences in the long run. These consequences are mainly born when these acts of retaliation are often left unjustified. Some of these societal consequences include:

Rise in Corruption: It doesn’t matter if it’s a small organisation, a large corporation, or even the government itself; when whistleblower retaliation is often left unchecked, it leads to a high level of corruption in society. Corrupt practices are carried out without fear of legal bodies because of continuous unchecked retaliation against whistleblowers.

When corruption overtakes any society, it leads to a lot of societal chaos, violence, and downfall. A corrupt society never produces good government, a corrupt society waters down the effect and power of democracy, and a corrupt society slowly births a lawless society.

Lack of Accountability: Whistleblowers help the media foster government and corporate accountability by acting as sources. As the Watchdogs of the government, the media can not do without sources, whether for credible information or evidence, they are needed. Accountability becomes a problem when there’s a refusal to speak up because of fear of retaliation or humiliation.

When issues that need immediate exposure are hidden, the well-being of society is at risk. Accountability helps large corporations and government bodies act right, and a lack of it means that the interests of the people are not prioritised.

Organisational Implications: The societal consequences of whistleblowing not only affect the people but also the corporations involved. When whistleblower retaliation takes place, a lot of times, the reputation of the corporation is affected. This reputational damage leads to the erosion of trust by the public.

The effect of this doesn’t only happen within the affected society, especially in the digital era, where everything crosses national boundaries within seconds. This also affects how society is perceived.

Why History Matters

History matters in corporate retaliation against whistleblowers. With history and patterns observed from the past, new narratives can be formed. Narratives that shape perspectives fairly and raise more whistleblowers who want to see justice prevail.

Historical patterns of corporate retaliation against whistleblowers matter, and these are some of the reasons:

It Predicts Patterns and Fosters Protection: There has been a repeated history of whistleblower retaliation by corporate bodies, which is why it is easily seen as a pattern. What this does is, when whistleblowing takes place, it helps the person involved know beforehand what will be attacked and work smartly against it.

This matters because with the knowledge formed around historical patterns, the whistleblower can immediately call upon organisations like OSHA, MSHA, and even other legal bodies to protect them. This can help them preserve their jobs, reputation, and properties before corporations even think of acting against them.

It’s a Call to Action: The history and record of past experiences of Whistleblowers retaliation is a call for corporate accountability. A call to action to organisations to protect whistleblowers, a call to action to organisations to better their systems, a call to action to the media actively supporting whistleblowers, and even going as far as promoting transparency.

History matters so that awareness can be created, lessons can be learned, whistleblower protection laws can be made, and history doesn’t always have to repeat itself. This, in turn, helps in raising more voices of whistleblowers who are protected, supported, and even applauded, not retaliated against and harassed.

Conclusion

Whistleblowers are bold and courageous individuals who stand firmly against corruption. Legal bodies and organisations should aim to protect whistleblowers so their voices are never lost. This reform can be carried out by ensuring that Whistleblowers are not denied access to their fundamental living rights. Another way is by making sure that corporate accountability is not overlooked when brought to the spotlight by whistleblowers.

FAQ