We are regularly asked: do you know of any whistleblower cases that ended well? Yes indeed! Look at this case study, for example.
Several whistleblower software providers say millions of reports come to them each year. It is our experience that in the vast majority of cases the report is resolved without any bad consequences for the whistleblower. You rarely hear about these things in the news. However, it is precisely the cases where things end badly for the reporter that make the press. But not all cases that make the press end badly for the whistleblower.
In July, NRC reported that Claessen Tankcleaning Venlo BV, a tank cleaning company, has been exposing employees to carcinogenic fumes and releasing harmful carcinogens into the Meuse River for years. The tankers were also not cleaned properly, according to the newspaper, and serious industrial accidents occurred, especially with Polish employees.
The local environmental supervisor knew about the abuses for 3 years but only issued warnings. The Labor Inspectorate imposed a fine of EUR 450 in 2021. That’s not much for a company that reported a profit of 1 million for that year. The prosecutor’s office had been notified but did not intervene further. Authorities faced capacity constraints and relied too long on the company’s good intentions, despite the fact that whistleblowers did share information with them.
On the day of publication by NRC, the Municipality of Venlo still carried out an inspection and temporarily halted the cleaning of tankers carrying benzene. Seven weeks later, the plant used for this purpose is again compliant. The company does remain under heightened scrutiny. The prosecution is still investigating whether to prosecute.
So these whistleblowers took their case first to the authorities, and when they did not intervene sufficiently to journalists. After that, action was taken. Since this is clearly a case of wrongdoing, reporters do not have to abide by their confidentiality clause and may report the matter to the authorities. And since these did not intervene sufficiently, they were then allowed to raise the matter with journalists. In doing so, they are protected from harm under the Whistleblower Protection Act, which went into effect this year. The reporters remained anonymous, which offers even better protection.
Who wants to be in the newspaper this way? It seems better to us to encourage employees to report abuses internally to an independent hotline, have the matter investigated by independent investigators and then take appropriate action. Indeed, this is now mandatory under the Whistleblower Protection Act.
The Integrity Coordinator is an independent, external coordinator of whistleblower procedures. Want to know more? If so, please contact us. If you would like to learn more about the Whistleblower Protection Act, you can also take a course with us, request our whitepaper or subscribe to our newsletter. Discover the power of a good speak-up culture!
