Whistleblower plays the wrong tune
A potential misunderstanding of the rules surrounding whistleblowing by employees was recently raised when retailer Marks & Spencer dismissed a man who revealed the company's redundancy plans to The Times newspaper.
He and his union, the GMB, maintained that he should have been protected as a whistleblower by the Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998. The employer, however, disagreed and dismissed him for gross misconduct, stating that he had broken his contract by disclosing confidential information.
The company said: "The employee concerned broke the company's rules and regulations, deliberately leaked internal company information and made derogatory and speculative comments to the media, despite a variety of internal routes available to address any concerns."
The Act exists to protect employees who make disclosures about crimes, breaches of legal obligations and miscarriages of justice. Indeed, many companies have their own whistleblowing policies in place that encourage employees to come forward with such information.
In short, the Act does not cover information that is disclosed simply because it is confidential (as opposed to revealing malpractice), however unpalatable it may be to the employee or interesting to the media. It would therefore appear that it is not relevant in this case, although the outcome of any future appeal will be interesting to see.
Contact
Judith Ellery Head of Employment
Bethan Southcombe Solicitor
Related Issues
This article summarises the law on issues which we believe may be of interest to your business. It is not a comprehensive review of the subjects and accordingly is published without responsibility for loss occasioned to any person(s) acting or refraining from action as a result of information published. This document is provided for information only and does not constitute legal advice. Professional legal advice should be obtained before taking or refraining from any action as a result of the contents of this document.