Skip to content

7 December, 2023

Advertise About Us
  • My Account
  • Subscribe
  • Log In
  • Log Out

Board Agenda

  • Governance
  • Strategy
  • Risk
  • Ethics
  • News
    • Categories

      • View All
      • Board Moves
    • workers on boards

      ‘Workers on boards’ idea is back on the table

      European-style two-tier board system may help to end stagnation in the UK, reports the Resolution...

    • AI catastrophe Avoiding AI catastrophe is ‘beyond corporate governance’

      It is ‘inevitable’ that the risks from artificial intelligence require public governance, according to a...

    • sustainability Where next for sustainability?

      An expert panel discussed their view of global trends for the business world in Board...

  • Insight
    • Categories

      • View all
      • Governance
      • Strategy
      • Risk
      • Ethics
      • Board Expertise
      • finance
      • Technology
    • AI priorities

      AI priorities for the board

      To reap the benefits of artificial intelligence, boards will need to work on their organisational...

    • purpose statement

      On purpose: crafting an authentic statement

      Purpose statements define how organisations align purpose and people. Here’s how to make a statement...

    • first-time CFO

      How to succeed as a first-time CFO

      The remit and responsibilities of the chief financial officer have changed, which can seem daunting...

  • Comment
      • View all
    • uk corporate governance

      Why UK corporate governance needs tightening up

      The LSE’s response to the government’s panicky U-turn on governance regulation is not helpful to...

    • faith in the UK Audit reform is essential to restore faith in the UK

      When it comes to understanding what attracts investors to a capital market, the London Stock...

    • U-turn on audit reform An uncomfortable U-turn on audit reform

      The government’s bonfire of the regulations expected for audit reform creates a source of uncertainty...

  • Interviews
      • View All Interviews
      • Podcasts
      • Webinars
    • sustainability Where next for sustainability?

      An expert panel discussed their view of global trends for the business world in Board...

    • reporting elements Boards urged to retain ‘beneficial’ reporting elements

      Although the government cancelled the requirement, resilience disclosures ‘cannot be wasted effort’, says senior auditco...

    • energy transition Collaboration is key to UK energy transition

      Communication, innovation and engagement are needed for the move to net zero, an expert panel...

  • Careers
      • View all
      • Selection
      • Board Moves
    • gender diversity study Academics criticise BlackRock gender diversity research

      Its methodology came under fire, with some critics also pointing out it was wrong to...

    • diversity of thought How to boost diversity of thought

      Companies benefit from diverse workforces, but also from having the input of different opinions and...

    • minority NED Number of minority NEDs drops

      Although there is some progress in diversity in other board roles, research suggests that boards...

  • Resource Centre
      • White Paper Downloads
      • Book Reviews
      • Corporate & Advisory Services
    • Risk Map: Top Risks 2024

      Control Risks' Top Risks for 2024 cut across the geopolitical, security, operational, regulatory, and cyber/digital...

    • A Director’s Guide to Conducting Internal Investigations 2023

      An internal investigation must be handled meticulously to avoid legal exposure, regulatory or criminal prosecution...

    • Spencer Stuart UK Board Index Highlights 2023 cover

      Spencer Stuart UK Board Index Highlights 2023

      The 2023 UK Spencer Stuart Board Index is a review of board composition and governance...

  • Events
  • Search by topic
    • Governance
    • Strategy
    • Risk
    • Ethics
    • Regulation
    • ESG
    • Investor Relations
    • Selection
    • Board Expertise
    • finance
    • Technology

What boards need to know about whistleblowing

by Ashurst Ashurst SPONSORED

Following a raft of corporate scandals uncovered by whistleblowers, the business risks associated with an individual revealing wrongdoing should not be underestimated in the boardroom.

whistleblower, whistleblowing, whistle, red card, yellow card

Image: Shutterstock

Big corporate scandals have made whistleblowing a headline topic. From Danske Bank to the Panama Papers, whistleblowers have thrown a spotlight on problematic behaviour.

Politicians and regulators have responded with measures to protect whistleblowers, seeing such individuals as a check on wrongdoing and a way of ensuring corporate accountability. But what are the key elements of whistleblowing in the UK and how do companies get it wrong?

The statutory regime for whistleblowing in the UK was established in 1998 with the Public Interest Disclosure Act, which followed a wave of corporate scandals.

Crucially, the legislation provides protection for whistleblowers. First, by deeming unfair any dismissal of a worker for making what is known as a “protected disclosure”. Second, by making unlawful any action that causes “detriment” to a worker if the action was prompted by the worker blowing the whistle.

Key to the legislation is the definition of “protected disclosure”. Whistleblowing is considered protected if a worker discloses information rather than making threats; the worker has a “reasonable belief” the disclosure is in the public interest; information is disclosed to specified persons such as the employer or to prescribed external bodies; and the disclosure relates to one of six kinds of “relevant failure”.

Failures considered relevant are breaches of a legal obligation and dangers to health and safety; criminal offences; miscarriages of justice; damage to the environment; and, lastly, covering up information about failures in these areas.

Public interest

Crowley Woodford, head of the European employment practice at law firm Ashurst, warns that the law in this area can be “tricky”. The requirement that workers need only have a “reasonable belief” that something is awry is a key example.

“That’s a relatively subjective test, “ says Woodford. “As long as the whistleblower subjectively believes that a breach has occurred and that is objectively reasonable, it does not matter if that belief later turns out to be wrong.”

There is a further warning as whistleblowing must be in the “public interest.” When originally enacted the legislation demanded that whistleblowing was in “good faith”. But, prompted by many workers reporting their own employment concerns, the public interest test was introduced as a counterweight.

“As long as the whistleblower subjectively believes that a breach has occurred and that is objectively reasonable, it does not matter if that belief later turns out to be wrong”

—Crowley Woodford, Ashurst

Woodford warns, however, that employment concerns can still be reported; all whistleblowers need do is show that their complaint applies to more than one individual.

The legislation is also open to use tactically by a worker. For example, when an individual’s professional performance is called into question, companies may find that he or she then blows the whistle and consequently argues that any dismissal
has arisen because of their whistleblowing.

“If the tribunal can see that there is a history of poor performance before the whistleblowing and a good paper trail evidencing this,” says Woodford, “that will present a powerful argument that the dismissal or detriment did not arise as retaliation for blowing the whistle.

“The problem is that employers often don’t do that and performance issues are often dealt with informally without documentation, leaving the company more exposed.”

As mentioned, whistleblowers are protected from “detriment” where they have made a protected disclosure. It is relatively easy for companies to ensure at the time of a report that a worker is not subjected to detriment.

According to Woodford, problems arise once an investigation has ended if a whistleblower is excluded from events as innocuous as project team meetings or discussions because that could be enough for someone to claim that detriment has taken place.

“The wider the knowledge of the whistleblowing spreads, the more potential there is for this type of exclusion to occur,” says Woodford. “It requires effective management and containment to a small group of individuals who are skilled in dealing with these issues.”

Restricting access to information also applies to anonymous whistleblowing because of the natural tendency for speculation to focus on who made the report. Protocols are therefore needed to govern access to information.

“Having these issues embedded in a policy is a powerful means of ensuring that the employer at each step is trying to afford the whistleblower protection,” concludes Woodford.

French flagThe situation in France

French multinationals have been implementing whistleblowing policies for some years, but the work was given added impetus in 2016 with the introduction of the Sapin II law.

The legislation details which companies must implement a whistleblowing policy (those with 50 employees or above), lays out step-by-step procedures to be followed and offers a definition of what constitutes whistleblowing.

However, according to Nataline Fleury, an employment law partner at Ashurst in Paris, a complex mesh of laws apply to whistleblowing in France. This includes Sapin II, data protection law (GDPR), law relating to works councils and legislation applying to disciplinary sanctions.

Sapin II procedures are designed to ensure whistleblowers do not face discrimination, while those found responsible for wrongdoing do not face sanctions that cannot be justified. That means taking great care with the process.

French whistleblowing is driven by a desire to avoid anonymous reports. Whistleblowers can claim anonymity but should not be encouraged. It is considered preferable for whistleblowers to be named.

“Where there is an opportunity to pass the matter to a regulator, it is better for them to investigate”

—Hubert Blanc-Jouvan, Ashurst

Confidentiality must also be maintained. This is why many French firms choose third-party service providers to handle their whistleblowing hotlines and investigatory procedures. It’s not mandatory, but it provides a level of assurance against leaks.

Risk then arises when an investigation is complete and a company must decide on what disciplinary action they will take.
Hubert Blanc-Jouvan, a regulatory partner with Ashurst, explains that in financial services, this is the point when matters are often handed to a regulator when related to financial regulations.

“Where there is an opportunity to pass the matter to a regulator, it is better for them to investigate,” he says. Additional requirements apply to financial firms and French regulators implement specific procedures to collect and deal with the reports received from whistleblowers, he adds.

Employers in unregulated sectors must decide which disciplinary action to take themselves. Here confidentiality remains paramount, as does the need to follow procedure as it is set down in law.

Fleury warns: “You need to ensure that the whistleblowing policy, the consultation process of the employee representatives, the information of the employees and the manner in which the whistleblowing procedure was followed through all comply with the law, or an employee can challenge any sanction faced by arguing that the process did not comply with the regulations.”

German flagThe situation in Germany

Unlike the UK and France, Germany has no specific whistleblower law. However, according to Andreas Mauroschat, an employment law expert at Ashurst in Frankfurt, German companies, especially those in financial services, have been implementing whistleblowing plans for many years. These have also become a mandatory part of the risk management obligations stipulated in the German Banking Act.

Regulatory requirements from BaFin, Germany’s financial regulator, are broad and simply ask firms to have some form of whistleblowing plan and procedure which allows employees to secretly provide information on breaches of certain laws, such as MAR (Market Abuse Regulation), the German Banking Act, the German Securities Trading Act and others.

“When there is a follow-up, or a challenge to a decision, we frequently see documentation for the original incident is not complete and elements of the process are undocumented”

—Andreas Mauroschat, Ashurst

Employee protection comes through labour laws because employment agreements impose a fiduciary duty on employees to disclose problematic behaviour, or go to an external body if the issue is thought to be in the public interest. In these circumstances an employer is prevented from taking any retaliatory action because the employee is not in breach of their employment contract.

According to Mauroschat, whistleblowing policies need to be robust with standard procedures that allow for benchmarking, action plans for containment and prevention plans addressing future processes. Most importantly, systems need to document each step taken during the whistleblower process, especially the reasons for any decisions taken on issues such as disciplinary action.

A failure to keep adequate records can lead to problems later. “We often see an incident is handled professionally,” says Mauroschat, “but when there is a follow-up, or a challenge to a decision, we frequently see documentation for the original incident is not complete and elements of the process are undocumented.”

One way to resolve that issue is through the use of new internet-based integrity systems. “These systems allow you to move away from managing data to managing a process, and avoid people failing to act correctly because the system forces you to take steps in line with internal policies,” says Mauroschat.

“They can be a very powerful tool and massively reduce risk.”

This article has been prepared in collaboration with Ashurst, a supporter of Board Agenda.

Related Posts

  • Boards must 'keep momentum going' to improve ethnic diversity
    December 20, 2021
    Board members making notes on documents

    Research reveals 123 boards in the FTSE 350 now have at least one director who is a person of colour, compared with just 59 last year.

  • What boards need to know about sanctions risk and legislation
    September 20, 2021
    Ryanair plane in Vilnius, Lithuania

    The forced diversion of a Ryanair flight to Belarus has put sanctions on the news agenda. Boards should be aware of the risks and legislation.

  • What boards need to know about sanctions risk and legislation
    September 20, 2021
    Ryanair plane in Vilnius, Lithuania

    The forced diversion of a Ryanair flight has put sanctions on the news agenda. Boards should be aware of the risks and legislation.

  • Why CFOs need to engage with external stakeholders
    April 7, 2022
    best from the CFO

    Ignoring the demands of external stakeholders has the potential to significantly impact a company’s brand, public image—and therefore profit.

For thoughtful journalism, expert insights on corporate governance and an extensive library of reports, guides and tools to help boards and directors navigate the complexities of their roles, subscribe to Board Agenda

ashurst, board expertise, employee rights, France, Germany, Regulation, Spring 2019, UK, whistleblowing

Search


Sign up to our Newsletter

Receive independent news, thoughtful journalism & expert insights about leadership, corporate governance & key boardroom issues straight to your inbox every week.

SIGN UP

Follow Us





Most Popular

  • Sustainability governance is on the rise
  • Why UK corporate governance needs tightening up
  • Proxy adviser warns LSE over governance
  • News round-up: this week in governance
  • How to future-proof your board

Featured Partner Profile

Diligent

Diligent

Diligent Corporation, which was founded in 2001, is headquartered in New York, NY with a European HQ in London. Diligent’s modern governance platform empowers leaders and teams at every level of the organisation to digitally transform and create ...

Featured Partner Resources

Leadership ESG

Leadership in ESG Integration: a study into UK board oversight, implementation and disclosure

This research report is based on detailed response...
The Engagement Appeal: The Path to Inclusive Investor Engagement

The Engagement Appeal: The Path to Inclusive Investor Engagement

This is the inaugural white paper from The Engagem...
Mazars c-suite 2023

Mazars C-suite barometer 2023

The Mazars C-suite barometer is based on responses...

Stakeholder Engagement: A Roadmap for UK Plc Boards

This guide aims to provide directors and their col...

Digital Boards: How Technology Adoption is Driving Culture Change and Resiliency

Digital tools proved their worth to boards during ...
Leadership in AI report

Leadership in AI

This report from Board Agenda and Mazars, in assoc...

A Director's Guide to Conducting Internal Investigations 2023

An internal investigation must be handled meticulo...

ADVERTISE – FREE CORPORATE LISTING

FREE - Add your company profile to our Corporate & Advisory Directory.
ADD

ADVERTISE – PROMOTE YOUR REPORTS & WHITEPAPERS

FREE - Add your company profile to our Corporate & Advisory Directory.
Add Resource

Register Free

Register to receive free article views, selected resource downloads, and all the latest news alerts straight to your inbox. Register


  • Editors & Contributors
  • Editorial Advisory Board
  • Corporate & Advisory Services
  • Media Marketing Solutions
  • Contact Us
  • Careers
  • Board Director Network
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookies
  • Sitemap
|

Copyright © 2023 Questor Media Group Ltd.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Sitemap