For some time we have been predicting that we will see more stories of whistleblowers on the front pages of newspapers. It turns out. Ten Department of Defense whistleblowers spoke to NRC about their experiences.
Earlier this year, we predicted that we will see more stories of whistleblowers on the front pages of newspapers. It looks like we are going to be right. Ten Department of Defense whistleblowers spoke to NRC about their experiences. They were bullied, disadvantaged and often it was the end of their careers. Sometimes reports were suddenly filed for minor past incidents. Their identities were often not kept confidential. They also indicate that the department that receives and follows up on reports is independent in name only, but not in practice.
In the absence of details, it is difficult to judge individual cases, but the statistics already speak volumes.
In 2021, only 11 of 216 reports were investigated. The Ministry preferably does not try to investigate a report but to resolve it by other means, such as mediation. Reporters indicate that they are sometimes advised not to pursue their report because it could have serious career consequences. Given experience, this does seem like honest and practical advice, but this is not how it should work.
In the past 5 years, only 7 out of 1224 reporters have been recognized as whistleblowers. The ministry indicates that the reports are rarely about social wrongdoing and thus are rarely true whistleblower reports. If so, I think it indicates particularly well what was wrong with the old legislation.
Sometimes settlements were reached with the reporter, which then included a confidentiality clause. The Ministry indicates that they no longer do so. Logical. Indeed, under the Whistleblower Protection Act (Wbk), silence clauses are invalid in whistleblower reports.
It seems that the Ministry needs to make the necessary improvements to comply with the Wbk:
– Recognize that the definition of a whistleblower report has broadened considerably. I expect that under the Wbk, far more than 0.6% of reports should be considered whistleblower reports. And why not investigate every report seriously?
– Ensure that the department receiving reports is truly independent, even in the eyes of employees, and thoroughly investigates reports or has them investigated.
– The identity of the reporter must remain confidential
– Anonymous reporting should soon be possible
In addition, it seems there is a leadership problem. Leaders should value whistleblowers, take appropriate action, not retaliation and certainly not try to sweep everything under the rug.
This is good advice anyway for any organization that does not want their whistleblowers to go to the media.
I also now better understand why it is so difficult for the Ministry to attract and retain staff. Young people aren’t picking up on this anymore. And rightfully so!
Want to know more about the Whistleblower Protection Act and good practices? Contact us.
