Skip to main content

Financial Incentives and Truth-Telling: The Growth of Whistle-Blowing Legislation in the United States

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Whistleblowing - A Comparative Study

Part of the book series: Ius Comparatum - Global Studies in Comparative Law ((GSCL,volume 16))

  • 1406 Accesses

Abstract

Although government efforts to encourage whistleblowers to come forward date back to 1778, the United States has enjoyed a conflicted history with respect to whistleblowers. While some commentators pillory Edward Snowden, some privacy rights advocates praise his actions. Perhaps reflecting these conflicting sentiments, current protections in the U.S. are a patchwork collection of industry-specific legislation. The current slate of legislation is largely the result of the confluence of recurring waves of media publicity exposing government fraud, the growth in government spending and involvement, and Congress’s attempts to respond to adverse publicity concerning government fraud. The succession of public crises running from Watergate to the wasteful spending in the Iraq War, to the collapse of the financial and securities industries have demonstrated that the government needs whistleblowers to help expose fraud and waste. As successive legislative attempts to extend whistleblower protections have demonstrated, reform “is usually precipitated by some crisis or new political movement that disrupts the preexisting status quo.”

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Stephen M. Kohn, The Whistle-Blowers of 1777 New York Times (12 June 2011) www.nytimes.com/2011/06/13/opinion/13kohn.html.

  2. 2.

    ND Bishara, ES Callahan, and TM Dworkin, The Mouth of Truth (2013) 10 New York University Journal of Law & Business 37, 43.

  3. 3.

    Justice Department Recovers $3.8 Billion from False Claims Act Cases in Fiscal Year 2013 (U.S. Department of Justice 20 December 2013). Available at www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-recovers-38-billion-false-claims-act-cases-fiscal-year-2013.

  4. 4.

    Bishara (n 2) 59–60.

  5. 5.

    Bishara (n 2) 61.

  6. 6.

    Brendan Sasso, ‘Amash: Snowden is a Whistleblower’(The Hill, 4 August 2013). Available at www.thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/blog-summaries/315413-rep-amash-snowden-is-a-whistleblower11.

  7. 7.

    Pema Levy, ‘NSA FISA Surveillance: Is Obama’s Latest Transparency Move A Trick?’ International Business Times (30 August 2013). Available at www.ibtimes.com/nsa-fisa-surveillance-obamas-latest-transparency-move-trick-1401972.

  8. 8.

    Fred Kaplan, ‘Fire DNI James Clapper: The Director of National Intelligence lied to Congress about NSA surveillance’ (Slate 13 June 2013). Available at www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/war_stories/2013/06/fire_dni_james_clapper_he_lied_to_congress_about_nsa_surveillance.html.

  9. 9.

    Kimberly Dozier, James Clapper: Answer On NSA Surveillance To Congress Was Clearly Erroneous (Huffington Post 2 July 2013) Available at www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/02/james-clapper-nsa_n_3536483.html.

  10. 10.

    Quinnipiac University Poll, Snowden Is Whistle-Blower, Not Traitor, U.S. Voters Tell Quinnipiac University National Poll (Quinnipiac University Poll, 1st August 2013). Available at www.quinnipiac.edu/images/polling/us/us08012013.pdf.

  11. 11.

    Gary Langer, ‘Attitudes Shift Against Snowden; Fewer than Half Say NSA is Unjustified’ (ABC News, 24 July 2013). Available at www.langerresearch.com/uploads/1150a3SnowdenandSecurity.pdf/.

  12. 12.

    Peter Van Buren, Obama’s War on Whistleblowers (Mother Jones 12 June 2012). Available at www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/06/obamas-whistleblowers-stuxnet-leaks-drones.

  13. 13.

    US Officials ‘betrayed’ CIA Agent (BBC News, 14 July 2006). Available at www.news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/5180906.stm.

  14. 14.

    Tim Shorrock, Obama’s Crackdown on Whistleblowers (Nation, 5 April 2013). Available at www.thenation.com/article/173521/obamas-crackdown-whistleblowers#.

  15. 15.

    Marc Pitzke, War on Whistleblowers: Has Obama Scrapped the First Amendment? (Spiegel Online Intl 24 July 2013). Available at www.spiegel.de/international/world/obama-wages-war-on-whistleblowers-and-journalists-a-912852.html.

  16. 16.

    Peter Eisler & Susan Page, ‘3 NSA Veterans Speak Out on Whistleblower: We Told You So’ (USA Today 15 June 2013). Available at www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/06/16/snowden-whistleblower-nsa-officials-roundtable/2428809/.

  17. 17.

    Eisler, NSA (2013).

  18. 18.

    R. Jeffrey Smith, Classified Pentagon Report Upholds Thomas Drake’s Complaints About NSA Washington Post 22 June 2011. Available at www.washingtonpost.com/national/national-security/classified-pentagon-report-upholds-thomas-drakes-complaints-about-nsa/2011/06/22/AG1VHTgH_story.html.

  19. 19.

    Douglas Burke, Thomas Drake Sentenced in NSA Leaks Case Huffington Post (15 July 2011). Available at www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/15/thomas-drake-nsa-leak_n_900384.html.

  20. 20.

    Pub. L. No. 111-148, 124 Stat. 119 (2010) (codified in scattered sections of 42 U.S.C.).

  21. 21.

    Robert G. Vaughn, The Successes and Failures of Whistleblower Laws (Cheltonham UK, Edward Elgar, 2012) p. 60–63.

  22. 22.

    Vaughn, Successes (2012) 25.

  23. 23.

    Daniel Elsberg, Why the Pentagon Papers Matter Now Guardian (London, 13th June 2011). Available at www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/jun/13/pentagon-papers-daniel-ellsberg.

  24. 24.

    Senate Committee on Government Affairs, 95th Cong. 2nd Session (1978).

  25. 25.

    Senate Committee (1978) 12, 28.

  26. 26.

    Robert G. Vaughn & Marion Weldon Brewer, The Spoiled System: A Call for Civil Service Reform (New York, Charterhouse 1975).

  27. 27.

    Pub. L. No. 95-454, 92 Stat. 1111 (1978) (codified in scattered sections of 5 U.S.C.).

  28. 28.

    Stephen Martin Kohn, The Whistleblower’s Handbook: A Step by Step Guide to Doing What’s Right and Protecting Yourself (Guilford, Lyons Press 2011) p. 49.

  29. 29.

    The 1994 Amendment altered the language of Section 7121(a)(1) of the CRSA to state that “the [collective bargaining agreement grievance] procedures shall be the exclusive administrative procedures for resolving grievances which fall within its coverage.”

  30. 30.

    31 U.S.C. §§ 3729-3733 (1986).

  31. 31.

    ibid.

  32. 32.

    ibid. at §§ 3729(a)(1)(A) & (B).

  33. 33.

    ibid. at § 3729(b)(1).

  34. 34.

    ibid. at § 3729(a)(1)(G). Individuals who conspire to violate the Act may be found liable under § 3729(a)(1)(C).

  35. 35.

    DL Haron, MV Dordeski, and LD Lahman, Bad Mules: A Primer on the Federal and Michigan False Claims Act Claims (November 2009) Michigan Bar Journal 22–25, Available at: www.michbar.org/journal/pdf/pdf4article1590.pdf (citing 31 U.S.C. § 3729(b)(1)).

  36. 36.

    31 U.S.C. § 3730(c)(1).

  37. 37.

    Under the provisions of the False Claim Act and related legislation a relator is the individual with direct knowledge of the fraud who files the civil action. See 31 U.S.C. § 3729–3730.

  38. 38.

    Haron, Dordeski, and Lahman, Bad Mules (n 36) 24.

  39. 39.

    See 31 U.S.C. § 3730(b)(2).

  40. 40.

    Pete Yost, False Claims Act Leads To $5 Billion In Government Recoveries Over Past Year Huffington Post (12 December 2012). Available at www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/04/false-claims-act_n_2238111.html .

  41. 41.

    The term “qui tam” stems from the common law writ that allowed a private individual who assisted in the prosecution of a case to recover damages. The phrase itself stems comes from a Latin phrase meaning “he who brings a case on behalf of our lord the King, as well as for himself”. See U.S. Department of Justice, False Claims Act Cases: Government Intervention in Qui Tam (Whistleblower) Cases (n.d). Available at www.doioig.gov/docs/falseclaimsact.pdf.

  42. 42.

    U.S. Department of Justice, ‘The False Claims Act: A Primer’(22 April 2011). Available at www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/civil/legacy/2011/04/22/C-FRAUDS_FCA_Primer.pdf.

  43. 43.

    31 U.S.C. § 3730(3)(c).

  44. 44.

    U.S. Department of Justice, False Claims Act Cases: Government Intervention in Qui Tam (Whistleblower) Cases 2 (n.d.). Available at www.justice.gov/usao/pae/Documents/fcaprocess2.pdf.

  45. 45.

    31 U.S.C. § 3730(d)(1).

  46. 46.

    According to the National Whistleblowers Center, the states of New York, California, and Virginia have enacted state versions of the False Claims Act which permit whistleblowers to recover a “finders’ fee” for reporting fraud.

  47. 47.

    31 U.S.C. § 3730(h) (stating that any employee who is discharged, demoted, harassed or otherwise discriminated against because of the employee’s lawful behavior under the Act is entitled to any relief necessary to make them whole including reinstatement, double back pay, compensation for other damages including litigation costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees).

  48. 48.

    “Any action” means demoting, suspending, terminating, or “in any other manner discriminat[ing] against [the employee] in the terms and conditions of employment ….”, ibid.

  49. 49.

    31 U.S.C. § 3730(h).

  50. 50.

    Nolan & Auerbach, ‘Recent False Claims Act Amendments Fully Protect Whistleblowers’(Qui Tam 101 Blog, 9 August 2010). Available at www.false-claims-act.net/recent-false-claims-act-amendments-fully-protect-whistleblowers-2/.

  51. 51.

    BG Santo, ‘The False Claims Act: Analysis of the Recently Expanded Legislation on Qui Tam Actions and Related Impact on Whistleblowers’ (July 2010) American Bar Association Health E-Source, available at www.americanbar.org/content/newsletter/publications/aba_health_esource_home/Volume6_SE2_Santo.html.

  52. 52.

    31 U.S.C. § 3731(b). There is currently a disagreement between circuits regarding whether the tolling provision applies only to cases in which the government has decided to intervene.

  53. 53.

    ibid.

  54. 54.

    ibid.

  55. 55.

    See, e.g., Manning v. Utilities Mutual Insurance Co., 254 F.3d 387, 397 (2d Cir. 2001) (six year limit governs private claims).

  56. 56.

    JE Fisch, ‘The New Federal Regulation of Corporate Governance’ (2004) 28 Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy 39, 40.

  57. 57.

    The initial WORLDCOM report was made by WORLDCOM vice president, Cynthia Cooper. See N Schichor, ‘Does Sarbanes-Oxley Force Whistleblowers to Sacrifice their Reputations?: An Argument for Granting Whistleblowers Non-Pecuniary Damages’ (2008) 8 University of California at Davis Business Law Journal 272, 273. A key figure in the disclosures of ENRON’s irregularities was ENRON Vice-President Sherron Watkins. See Shaheen Pasha, ‘Enron’s Whistle Blower Details Sinking Ship’ (CNNMoney.com, 16 March 2006). Available at www.money.cnn.com/2006/03/15/news/newsmakers/enron/.

  58. 58.

    Pub. L. No. 107-204, 116 Stat. 745 (2002) (codified in scattered sections of 15 U.S.C. & 18 U.S.C.).

  59. 59.

    Vaughn (n 22) 152.

  60. 60.

    Schichor (n 58) 276 (citing S. Rep. No. 107-46, at 5, 10 (2002)).

  61. 61.

    Amendments to the SOX enacted in 2010 extended protection to employees of a public company’s subsidiary if the subsidiary’s finances are consolidated into the parent company’s financial statements.

  62. 62.

    15 U.S.C. § 78j-1(m)(4)(A) (Supp. IV 2004).

  63. 63.

    18 U.S.C. §1514A (2002).

  64. 64.

    Vaughn (n 22) 152.

  65. 65.

    18 U.S.C. § 1513 (e).

  66. 66.

    18 U.S.C. § 1514b(1)(b).

  67. 67.

    That amendment was included within the Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010, Pub. L. No. 111-203, 124 Stat. 1376 (2010) (codified in scattered sections of 5 U.S.C., 12 U.S.C., 15 U.S.C. & 18 U.S.C.). See discussion below, pt G.

  68. 68.

    ‘What is the Sarbanes-Oxley (SOX) Act?’ (Katz, Marshall & Banks Blog (n.d.)). Available at www.kmblegal.com/practice-areas/whistleblower-law/sarbanes-oxley/.

  69. 69.

    Richard E. Moberly, ‘Unfulfilled Expectations: An Empirical Analysis of Why Sarbanes-Oxley Whistleblowers Rarely Win’ (2007) 49 William & Mary Law Review 65, 70(citing 29 C.F.R. § 1980.104(b)(1) (2006)).

  70. 70.

    See 29 C.F.R. §1980.104(c) (2006).

  71. 71.

    Moberly (n 69) at 79 (citing 29 C.F.R.§1980.105 (2006)).

  72. 72.

    The Act also defines the scope of compensatory damages permitted under the legislation. Those damages include: reinstatement to a position with the same seniority that the employee would have had, back pay with interest, and “compensation for any special damages sustained as a result of the discrimination, including litigation costs, expert witness fees, and reasonable attorney fees.” See 18 U.S.C. §1514C(2)(a).

  73. 73.

    See 29 C.F.R. §1980.107(b).

  74. 74.

    ibid. § 1980.110.

  75. 75.

    ibid. § 1980.110(b).

  76. 76.

    ibid. § 1980.110(b)-(c).

  77. 77.

    ibid. §§ 1980.112(a) & 1980.105(c).

  78. 78.

    Statement by President George W. Bush upon Signing H.R. 3763 (July 30, 2002), reprinted in 2002 U.S.C.C.A.N. 543 (“The legislative purpose of section 1514A … is to protect against company retaliation for lawful cooperation with investigations and not to define the scope of investigative authority, therefore, the executive branch shall construe section 1514A(a)(1)(B) as referring to investigations authorized by the rules of the Senate or the House of Representatives and conducted for a proper legislative purpose.”).

  79. 79.

    See Kelly Wallace, ‘Senators: Bush Could Undercut Whistleblowers’ (CNN, 31 July 2002) (reporting that U.S. Senators Pat Leahy (D-Vermont) and Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) sent to President Bush on July 31, 2002, a letter expressing concerns with the signing statement). See also 152 Cong. Rec. S8189-90 (2006) (statement of Sen. Leahy). Available at www.fas.org/irp////////////congress/2006_cr/s072506.html (stating that Bush’s interpretation was at odds with the plain language of the statute, and the administration reluctantly relented on this view).

  80. 80.

    Moberly (n 69) at 67.

  81. 81.

    Moberly (n 69) at 90.

  82. 82.

    Moberly (n 69) at 100.

  83. 83.

    Moberly (n 69) at 146.

  84. 84.

    According to 18 U.S.C. § 1514A(b)(2)(D) (Supp. IV 2004), the complaint must be filed within 90 days of the retaliation. Any appeal must be filed within 30 days of an OSHA decision. See 29 C.F.R. § 1980.105(c) (2006).

  85. 85.

    Tides v. Boeing Co., Nos. C08-1601-JCC & C08-1736-JCC, 2010 WL 537639 (W.D. Wash. Feb. 2, 2010), affd, 644 F.3d 809 (9th Cir. 2011).

  86. 86.

    Stephen Shiffman & Jonathan Rotenberg, “District Court limits the Sarbanes-Oxley Acts Whistleblower Protections” (Lexology 12 February 2010). Available at www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=c9fbf3d6-eefb-48c8-9cc2-95353d851d9c.

  87. 87.

    15 U.S.C. §§ 2051-2085 (2006) (CPSIA). The CPSIA amends the Consumer Product Safety Act of 1972, 15 U.S.C. §§2051-2089. (1972) (CPSA).

  88. 88.

    Stephen Labaton, ‘Strengthening of Consumer Agency Opposed by its Boss’ New York Times (30 October 2007). Available at www.nytimes.com/2007/10/30/washington/30cnd-consumer.html?_r=0.

  89. 89.

    Labaton, New York Times (2007).

  90. 90.

    See 15 U.S.C. §2087(b).

  91. 91.

    id. §2087(a).

  92. 92.

    id. §2087(b)(1).

  93. 93.

    id. §2087(b)(2)(A).

  94. 94.

    id. §2087(b)(3)(B).

  95. 95.

    id. §2087(b)(4)(A)-(C).

  96. 96.

    Scott D. McBride, ‘Something Wicked This Way Comes: The United States Government’s Response to Unsafe Imported Chinese Toys and Subsidized Chinese Exports’ (2009) 45 Texas International Law Journal 233, 246 (citing Public Citizen, Closing Santa’s Sweatshop: How to Deliver on Obama’s and Congress’ Toy-Safety and Fair Trade Promises 6, 24 (2008)), available at www.citizen.org/documents/SantasSweatshop08.pdf .

  97. 97.

    David Lazarus, ‘Obama needs to add consumer agency to his to-do list’ Los Angeles Times (19 August 2011). Available at www.articles.latimes.com/2011/aug/19/business/la-fi-lazarus-20110819.

  98. 98.

    S. Rep. No. 111-10, at 2 (2009).

  99. 99.

    Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act of 2009, Pub. L. No. 111-21, 123 Stat. 1617 (2009) (codified in scattered sections of 18 U.S.C.).

  100. 100.

    155 Cong. Rec. S4774, S4775 (2009) (statement of Sen. Leahy).

  101. 101.

    See Rep. No. 111-10, at 10 (2009), available at www.nacua.org/documents/SenateJudiciaryrReport_111_10.pdf#nameddest=EffectivenessFCA.

  102. 102.

    Press Release, Senator Patrick Leahy, ‘Comment of Senator Patrick Leahy on False Claims Act Settlements in 2011’ (19 December 2011). Available at www.leahy.senate.gov/press/comment-of-senator-patrick-leahy-on-false-claims-act-settlements-in-2011.

  103. 103.

    31 U.S.C. § 3730(h).

  104. 104.

    id. § 3729(a).

  105. 105.

    See id. § 3730(h).

  106. 106.

    See, e.g., Guerro v. Total Renal Care, Inc., No. EP-11-CV-449-KC, 2012 U.S. Dist LEXIS 32615 (W.D. Tex. Mar. 12, 2012).

  107. 107.

    553 U.S. 662, 669 (2008).

  108. 108.

    S. Rep. No. 111-10, at 10 (2009), available at www.nacua.org/documents/SenateJudiciaryrReport_111_10.pdf#nameddest=EffectivenessFCA.

  109. 109.

    Letter from M. Faith Burton, Acting Assistant Att’y Gen., U.S. Dep’t of Justice, to Sen. Patrick J. Leahy, Chairman, Senate Judiciary Committee (24 February 2009). Available at www.nacua.org/documents/LetterToSenLeahy_DoJ_Views_on_Section4_of_FERA_2.pdf.

  110. 110.

    ‘False Claims Act Recoveries Double in One Year to $9 Billion’ Corporate Crime Reporter (10 October 2012). Available at www.corporatecrimereporter.com/news/200/falseclaimsactrecoveries10102012/.

  111. 111.

    False Claims Act (2012).

  112. 112.

    A Kesselheim, D Studdert, and Mello, ‘Whistle-Blowers’ Experiences in Fraud Litigation Against Pharmaceutical Companies,’ (2010) 362 New England Journal of Medicine 1832.

  113. 113.

    Pub. L. No. 111-148, 124 Stat. 119 (2010) (codified in scattered sections of 42 U.S.C.).

  114. 114.

    ‘2010 Mid-Year False Claims Act Update’ (GibsonDunn 9 July 2010). Available at www.gibsondunn.com/publications/pages/2010mid-yearfalseclaimsactupdate.aspx.

  115. 115.

    See, e.g., ‘U.S. Health Care Reform Legislation Significantly Expands the False Claims Act’ (GibsonDunn 2 April 2010). Available at www.gibsondunn.com/publications/pages/HealthCareReformLegislationExpandstheFalseClaimsAct.aspx.

  116. 116.

    31 U.S.C. 3730(e)(4)(A). The current version of the FCA reads “the Court shall dismiss an action or claim under this section, unless opposed by the Government, if substantially the same allegations or transactions alleged in the action or claim were publicly disclosed.”

  117. 117.

    id. § 3730(e)(4)(B).

  118. 118.

    See PPACA §1313.

  119. 119.

    See id. §1558.

  120. 120.

    id.

  121. 121.

    No. 07-123 (A.R.B. Dep’t of Labor, May 25, 2011) (holding that, according to the SOX provisions, a whistleblower does not need to show that an actual SOX violation occurred, only that she had a subjective and objective “reasonable belief” that the conduct she complained about amounted to a SOX violation).

  122. 122.

    29 C.F.R. § 1984.

  123. 123.

    S. Tony Ling & Richard Joseph Zito, ‘Occupational Safety & Health Administration extends broad whistleblower protections to employees complaining of violations of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act’ (Lexology 18 March 2013). Available at www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=881218b5-4b23-4819-9b9d-45ae6aad58ea.

  124. 124.

    id.

  125. 125.

    29 C.F.R. §1984.

  126. 126.

    id.

  127. 127.

    These include that individuals who administer the expansion of the Medicare and Children’s Health Insurance (CHIP) programs; care for the elderly in nursing homes’ “innovative treatment and therapies; payments and reimbursements outside the state exchanges; prescription drugs and preventative care; house-call visits; expansion of and increasing in training for the health care workforce; and grants for the expansion of health care to under-served populations.” M Schutz, ‘Whistleblower Protections in the Affordable Care Act,’ (Lexology 20 April 2010). Available at www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=e5d83cf5-6f63-4390-8ade-f338587dea98.

  128. 128.

    Kesselheim (n 113) 1838.

  129. 129.

    Pub. L. No. 111-203, 124 Stat. 1376 (2010) (codified in scattered sections of 5 U.S.C., 12 U.S.C., 15 U.S.C. & 18 U.S.C.).

  130. 130.

    31 U.S.C. § 3730(h).

  131. 131.

    G Rapp, ‘Mutiny by the Bounties? The Attempt to Reform Wall Street by the New Whistleblower Provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act’ (2012) Brigham Young University Law Review 73, 76.

  132. 132.

    Rapp, Mutiny (2012) at 78.

  133. 133.

    A Casey & A Niblett, ‘Noise Reduction: The Screening Value of Qui Tam’ (2013). Available at www.ssrn.com/abstract=22376589.

  134. 134.

    Samuel Rubenfeld, ‘SEC Receives 3,000 tips in Last Year,’ (Wall St. J. Corruption Currents (15 November 2012)). Available at www.blogs.wsj.com/corruption-currents/2012/11/15/sec-receives-3000-tips-in-the-past-year/ .

  135. 135.

    See Dodd-Frank Act §§ 748, 922.

  136. 136.

    Ben Kerschberg, ‘The Dodd-Frank Act’s Robust Whistleblowing Incentives’ Forbes (18. April 2011). Available at www.forbes.com/sites/benkerschberg/2011/04/14/the-dodd-frank-acts-robust-whistleblowing-incentives/.

  137. 137.

    28 U.S.C. § 1658(a).

  138. 138.

    17 C.F.R § 240.21 F-2(b)(1).

  139. 139.

    10 U.S.C. § 1034.

  140. 140.

    49 U.S.C. § 42121 (creating the Federal Aviation Whistleblower Protection Program).

  141. 141.

    id. § 31105 (amended by The Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007, Pub. L. No. 110-53, 121 Stat. 266).

  142. 142.

    15 U.S.C. § 2087.

  143. 143.

    id. § 265.1.

  144. 144.

    42 U.S.C. § 762. There are other whistleblower protection provisions embedded in other environmental acts, including: Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), 42 U.S.C. § 9610; Federal Water Pollution Control Act, 33 U.S.C. § 1367; Safe Drinking Water Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300j-9(i); Solid Waste Disposal Act, 42 U.S.C. § 6971; Toxic Substances Control Act, 15 U.S.C. § 2622; and Pipeline Safety Improvement Act, 49 U.S.C. § 60129.

  145. 145.

    21 U.S.C. § 391 et seq.

  146. 146.

    42 U.S.C. § 5851.

  147. 147.

    49 U.S.C. § 20109.

  148. 148.

    id. § 30171.

  149. 149.

    6 U.S.C. § 1142.

  150. 150.

    29 U.S.C. § 660.

  151. 151.

    Pub. L. No. 101-12, 103 Stat. 16 (codified in scattered sections of 5 U.S.C.).

  152. 152.

    5 U.S.C. § 2302(a)(2)(B)(i).

  153. 153.

    A full list of employees not covered by the WPA include employees of the Postal Service, Postal Rate Commission, Government Accountability Office, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Central Intelligence Agency, Defense Intelligence Agency, National Imagery and Mapping Agency, National Security Agency, and other agencies designated by the President that conduct foreign intelligence or counter-intelligence activities. See 5 U.S.C. § 2302(a)(2)(C).

  154. 154.

    LP Whitaker, ‘The Whistleblower Protection Act: An Overview’ (2007) Congressional Research Service 1. Available at www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL33918.pdf.

  155. 155.

    5 U.S.C. § 2302(a)(2)(B).

  156. 156.

    id. § 2302(a)(8)(A).

  157. 157.

    Whitaker (n 155) at 4.

  158. 158.

    Merit Systems Protection Board, ‘Whistleblower Protections to Federal Employees: A Report to the President and the Congress’ (2010). Available at www.mspb.gov/netsearch/viewdocs.aspx?docnumber=557972&version=559604&application=ACROBAT.

  159. 159.

    5 U.S.C. § 2302(c).

  160. 160.

    Whitaker (n 155) Summary.

  161. 161.

    5 U.S.C. § 2302(a)(2)(A).

  162. 162.

    Those decisions included: (1) Horton v. Dept of the Navy, 66 F.3d 279, 282 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (holding that disclosures to the alleged wrongdoer are not protected); (2) Willis v. Dept of Agric., 141 F.3d 1139, 1144 (Fed. Cir. 1998) (excluding from protection a disclosure made as part of an employee’s normal job duties) and (3) Meuwissen v. Dept of Interior, 234 F.3d 9, 12–13 (Fed. Cir. 2000) (holding that disclosures of information already known are not protected). For an extensive discussion of the legislative changes, see ‘Congress Strengthens Whistleblower Protections for Federal Employees’ ABA Section of Labor and Employment Law, (Flash Nov.-Dec. 2012). Available at www.americanbar.org/content/newsletter/groups/labor.law/ll_flash/1212_abalel_flash/lel_flash12_2012spec.html.

  163. 163.

    Pub. L. No. 112-199, 126 Stat. 1465 (2012).

  164. 164.

    Joe Davidson, ‘Congress Approves Stronger Whistleblower Protections’ Washington Post (13 November 2012). Available at www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/federal-eye/wp/2012/11/13/congress-approves-stronger-whistleblower-protections/?clsrd.

  165. 165.

    M A Cherry, ‘Whistling in the Dark? Corporate Fraud, Whistleblowers and the Implications of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act for Employment Law’ (2004) 79 Washington Law Review 1029, 1049.

  166. 166.

    Examples of states that only protect public employees include: Alabama (State Employees Protection Act, Ala. Code § 13A-12-1); Colorado (Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-50.5-101 et seq.); and Missouri (Mo. Rev. Stat. § 105.055). Examples of states with more comprehensive protection that extends to private employers include: Florida (Fla. Stat. § 448.102); Nebraska (Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 48-1102 & 48-1114) (applying to all firms with more than 15 employees); and Rhode Island (R.I. Gen Laws § 28-50-4). For a summary of state whistleblower protections, see ‘State Whistleblower Laws’ National Conference of State Legislatures (Nov. 2010). Available at www.ncsl.org/issues-research/labor/state-whistleblower-laws.aspx.

  167. 167.

    G Sinzdak, ‘An Analysis of Current Whistleblower Laws: Defending a More Flexible Approach to Reporting Requirements’ (2008) 96 California Law Review 1633, 1641–41.

  168. 168.

    Petermann v. International Broth. of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, Local

    396, 174 Cal. App. 2d 184 (Cal. Ct. App. 1959).

  169. 169.

    RS Oswald and M Vogelsang, Jr. ‘The ABCs of Common Law Wrongful Termination Claims In The Washington Metropolitan Region’ (2013) 3 Labor & Employment Law Forum no. 2: 197–262.

  170. 170.

    42 C.F.R. § 455.14.

  171. 171.

    Pub. L. No. 109-171, 120 Stat. 4 (2006).

  172. 172.

    ‘Incentivising State False Claim Acts’ National Conference of State Legislatures (7 March 2013). Available at www.ncsl.org/issues-research/health/clarifying-requirements-for-a-state-false-claims-a.aspx.

  173. 173.

    MK Ramirez, ‘Blowing the Whistle on Whistleblower Protection: A Tale of Reform Versus Power’ (2007) 76 University of Cincinnati Law Review 183, 198.

Bibliography

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shawn Marie Boyne .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Boyne, S.M. (2016). Financial Incentives and Truth-Telling: The Growth of Whistle-Blowing Legislation in the United States. In: Thüsing, G., Forst, G. (eds) Whistleblowing - A Comparative Study. Ius Comparatum - Global Studies in Comparative Law, vol 16. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-25577-4_15

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-25577-4_15

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-25575-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-25577-4

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics