Whistleblower Law Blog

Virginia Court Holds Fraud Investigator Can Sue for Wrongful Discharge

September 01, 2010

A Warren County Circuit held that a fraud investigator can sue her employer for wrongful discharge under Bowman when the employer interferes with her fraud investigations and subsequently fires her for appearing before a grand jury.  Click here for the full opinion.

The employment lawyers at The Employment Law Firm® have extensive experience representing those wrongfully discharged.  To learn more about the firm’s practice areas, click here.

Judge Rules D.C. Whistleblower Protection Act Amendment Retroactive

August 27, 2010

According to the Government Accountability Project’s blog, D.C. Superior Court Judge Leonard Braman held that a recent amendment to the D.C. Whistleblower Protection Act (WPA) exempting whistleblowers from the requirement of notifying the District of a claim within six months of the adverse employment action should apply retroactively.  Therefore, the notice requirement in D.C. Code §12-309 will not bar relief in pending D.C. WPA claims.

For information on The Employment Law Group® law firm’s Whistleblower Practice, click here.

New York AG Settles Qui Tam Lawsuit with School Lunch Provider for $20 Million

August 27, 2010

The Attorney General of New York has settled its lawsuit against Sodexo, a provider of school lunches, for $20 million.  Two whistleblowers, John and Jay Carciero, filed the qui tam action alleging Sodexo received illegal kickbacks from the vendors it selected for school lunch programs.  Under New York law, whistleblowers are entitled to a reward of up to 20% of the recouped funds.

Iowa Egg Recall Spotlights Senate Food Safety Bill

August 25, 2010

According to the Wall Street Journal, Senate leaders – motivated by a recent salmonella outbreak and massive egg recall – will likely bring their version of the Food Safety Modernization Act to a vote in the full Senate on September 13.  Click here for a copy of Senate Bill S. 510.  The House has already passed its own version of the Bill, H.R. 875, last year.  Click here for a copy of the House version.  Approximately 1300 cases of salmonella may be linked to eggs produced in Iowa and could lead to a recall of more than half a billion eggs.

For more information about the firm’s Whistleblower Law Practice, click here.

Big Reward Potential Likely to Lure More Whistleblowers to the SEC

August 23, 2010

According to Time, the new SEC whistleblower reward program established by the Dodd-Frank Act will likely lead to a substantial increase in the reporting of fraud and other wrongdoing by public companies to the SEC.  Under the previous SEC reward program, the SEC granted rewards between 0% and 10% to whistleblowers at the SEC’s discretion.  Under the Dodd-Frank Act, the SEC is now required to grant a reward between 10% and 30% to each whistleblower providing original information leading to a sanction that exceeds $1 million.

For information about The Employment Law Group® law firm’s SEC Whistleblower Practice, click here.

Whistleblower Retaliation Protection for Congressional Staff Languishes in Senate Committee

August 19, 2010

According to an article in Politico, the Congressional Whistleblower Protection Act introduced by Senators Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Claire McCaskill (D-Missouri) has yet to be reported to the full Senate and continues to languish in the Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs.  Similar to the Whistleblower Protection Act which protects most federal employees who blow the whistle on illegal activity from retaliation, the Congressional Whistleblower Protection Act would extend the same retaliation protection to congressional staff who report illegal activity occurring within Congress. 

For more information about the firm’s Whistleblower Law Practice, click here.

Dodd-Frank Whistleblower Provisions Are Expected to Generate Increase in Whistleblower Litigation

August 17, 2010

According to an article in The Washington Post, the whistleblower provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act (DFA), which provide a substantial incentive to report financial fraud, are expected to generate a substantial increase in whistleblower litigation.  The DFA requires the SEC and Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) to provide a financial reward to whistleblowers who provide original information leading to monetary sanctions that in excess of $1 million.  The law also prohibits employers from retaliating against whistleblowers.

The Employment Law Group® Files Amicus Brief Arguing that Section 929A of the Dodd-Frank Act Applies to Pending Sarbanes-Oxley Whistleblower Cases

August 16, 2010

On August 13, 2010, The Employment Law Group® filed an amicus curiae brief in Johnson v. Siemens Building Technologies, Inc., on behalf of the Government Accountability Project, National Employment Lawyers Association, and National Whistleblowers Center arguing that Section 929A of the Dodd-Frank Act clarifies and confirms existing law on the scope of coverage under SOX, and therefore should be applied to pending cases.  A copy of the brief is available here.  To learn more about the whistleblower provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act, click here.

The attorneys at The Employment Law Group® law firm have substantial experience representing whistleblowers under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and other whistleblower statutes.  For more about firm’s Sarbanes-Oxley Whistleblower Practice, click here.

DOJ ARB Rejects “Duty Speech” Defense to ERA Nuclear Whistleblower Retaliation Claims

August 11, 2010

In Vinnett v. Mitsubishi Power Systems, the Department of Labor Administrate Review Board held that employees who report nuclear safety concerns engage in protected conduct under Section 211 of the Energy Reorganization Act (ERA) regardless of whether they are blowing the whistle in the course of performing their job duties.  The ARB states:

[T]here is nothing in the language of the ERA that carves out an exception limiting whistleblower protection based on an employee’s job duties. To the contrary, the statute protects “any employee” who engages in protected activity. Congress passed the ERA in 1974 as part of its continuing effort to regulate the production, use, and control of nuclear energy. An employee protection provision was added in 1978 to protect employees who assist or participate in any proceeding to administer or enforce the requirements of the ERA or the Atomic Energy Act of 1954. Nuclear safety is encouraged by protecting workers from retaliation because they report safety concerns. “The whistleblower provision in the [ERA] is modeled on, and serves an identical purpose to, the provision in the Mine Health and Safety Act [sic]. They share a broad, remedial purpose of protecting workers from retaliation based on their concerns for safety and quality.” As the court in Mackowiak observed, “The [Secretary’s] ruling simply forbids discrimination based on competent and aggressive inspection work. In other words, contractors regulated by [the ERA] may not discharge quality control inspectors because they do their jobs too well.” Congress amended the ERA in 1992 to expand its whistleblower protection to workers who report safety violations to their employers. Because the ALJ erroneously concluded that Vinnett had not engaged in protected activity because he was just doing his job, the ALJ committed reversible error.

This is a significant rejection of the “duty speech” defense and likely applies to all whistleblower protection actions litigated before DOL.

For information about The Employment Law Group® law firm’s Whistleblower Retaliation Practice and Nuclear Whistleblower Practice, click here.

SEC Asserts Congress Intended SOX to Protect Employees of Consolidated Subsidiaries of Publicly-Traded Companies

August 10, 2010

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filed an amicus curiae brief asserting that Congress intended Section 806 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) to protect whistleblowers working for consolidated subsidiaries of publicly-traded companies.  The SEC states:

The [SEC] believes that the whistleblower protections of Section 806 apply not only to employees of parent companies that file financial reports with the [SEC], but also to employees of their non-public subsidiaries whose results are required to be included in their parent’s consolidated financial statements.  Thus, the [SEC] agrees with the [Administrative Law Judge] decisions in [Morefield v. Exelon Services, Inc.] and [Walters v. Deutsche Bank AG]. This interpretation is also consistent with the clarifying amendment recently adopted by Congress as Section 929A of the Dodd-Frank Act of 2010.

…

[D]espite the fact that subsidiaries are not expressly listed as covered entities, the language, purpose and structure of the statute indicate that they should be viewed as part of the same “company”….  [I]n covering reporting companies, Congress wished to encourage whistleblowing concerning violations that could render the financial statements of those companies inaccurate or misleading. It is clear from the [SEC’s] requirements concerning consolidated subsidiaries that misconduct at a consolidated subsidiary could lead to defects in the parent’s financials filed with the [SEC], so it is reasonable to conclude that Congress intended the protections to extend to employees of the subsidiaries.

The employment lawyers at The Employment Law Group® law firm have substantial experience representing employees in Sarbanes-Oxley whistleblower proceedings and have written numerous articles about the whistleblower provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.  For more information about TELG’s Sarbanes-Oxley Whistleblower Practice, click here.