Skip to content

18 May, 2022

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

Board Agenda

  • Governance
  • Strategy
  • Risk
  • Ethics
  • News
    • Categoriess

      • View All
      • Board Moves
    • Houses of Parliament

      Government confirms commitment to sustainability disclosure requirements

      The UK will proceed with legislative plans for SDRs, including transition reports, after the proposals...

    • Amanda Blanc, Aviva CEO News round-up: this week in governance

      Aviva CEO faces "inappropriate" remarks at shareholder meeting; warning for Twitter board over free speech;...

    • Prince Charles reads the Queen's Speech on 10 May 2022. Queen’s Speech fails to provide clarity on audit reform plans

      While the creation of ARGA is confirmed, details about other proposed changes are scant and...

  • Insight
    • Categories

      • View all
      • Governance
      • Strategy
      • Risk
      • Ethics
      • Board Expertise
      • finance
      • Technology
    • Businessman surrounded by news reporters

      The heavy cost of boardroom disasters

      The size and global reach of modern businesses means that the repercussions of scandals and...

    • Multicolour building blocks

      Parker Review: progress update and priorities for change

      The latest review identifies the work of increasing and maintaining ethnic diversity on UK boards,...

    • President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelensky visits Bucha, 4 April 2022

      What Ukraine teaches us about effective leadership in a crisis

      In conflicts and crises, people look to both political and business leaders for reassurance, competence...

  • Comment
      • View all
    • Businessman in thinker pose

      What’s a company for? Milton Friedman responds

      The ongoing lively debate about corporate purpose has caused me to reflect further on the...

    • Maritime workers protest about the sacking of P&O workers How to sink a reputation: lessons from the P&O Ferries crisis

      The company has destroyed the trust of passengers and employees, and demonstrated the consequences of...

    • Ukraine flag with coding Business concern over cyber attacks rises in wake of Ukraine conflict

      Geopolitical uncertainty is leading firms to boost their defences against cyber attacks. But true digital...

  • Interviews
      • View All Interviews
      • Podcasts
      • Webinars
    • Sir Donald Brydon Sir Donald Brydon on audit reform, career NEDs and board relationships

      While bemoaning the "glacial" pace of audit reform, he hails the pandemic's transformation of communication...

    • Forex graph behind boardroom Webinar: what’s next for boards in financial services?

      Our panel of experts share their thoughts on some of the current and future challenges...

    • Man working remotely Pandemic ‘opened door’ to the use of new boardroom technology

      A recent webinar hosted by Board Agenda and Diligent explored the ways boards are using...

  • Careers
      • View all
      • Selection
      • Board Moves
    • Business meeting Age-diverse boards associated with less corporate misconduct

      More age diversity, researchers say, could reduce “groupthink” and lead to “more critical judgment of...

    • CEO leaving office after resignation Most CEO ‘resignations’ may actually be terminations

      Retired, resigned or left the company? A Stanford study suggests more chief executives are pushed...

    • Executives following different leadership paths Selecting a direction: the six paths to leadership

      The distinct paths taken by executives when assuming leadership roles will influence their perspectives and...

  • Resource Centre
      • White Paper Downloads
      • Book Reviews
      • Corporate & Advisory Services
    • Board Effectiveness: A Survey of the C-Suite

      More than 550 public company C-suite executives share their perspective on their boards’ overall effectiveness,...

    • 2022 AGM Season Forecast: An Eye on The Horizon

      To help prepare for AGMs in 2022, Equiniti (EQ) highlights three key themes of the...

    • Annual Review of Corporate Reporting 2020/21

      This report contains the main findings arising from FRC's corporate reporting monitoring work, which is...

  • Events
  • Search by topic
    • Governance
    • Strategy
    • Risk
    • Ethics
    • Regulation
    • ESG
    • Investor Relations
    • Selection
    • Board Expertise
    • finance
    • Technology
  • Magazine
      • View All
      • Sustainability Works
      • Tomorrow's Leaders
      • Renumeration Tightrope
      • Governance Ascendance
      • Sense In Sustainability
      • Invisible Enemies

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.

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • LinkedIn
  • Mail

Related Posts

  • Why boards need to support whistleblowers
    March 8, 2019
    whistleblowing, social media

    The recently revised UK Corporate Governance Code has re-emphasised the importance of whistleblowing. Resources are available to help boards ensure they are well placed to…

  • Women bring under-represented skills to boards
    October 5, 2016

    Study finds that female board directors in the US are more likely to have the least common skill sets.

  • Boards fail to talk risk
    May 14, 2015
    risk management

    Deloitte research reveals financial firms could do more on risk.

  • Boards fail to describe preferred culture to staff, survey shows
    September 25, 2017
    male boards

    Survey reveals one-third of boards do not define the culture they want among employees, while one-fifth said culture is included as an aspect of their…

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

  • What’s a company for? Milton Friedman responds
  • Queen’s Speech fails to provide clarity on audit reform plans
  • Working from home? Stay alert to the risk of cyber-attacks
  • Government confirms commitment to sustainability disclosure requirements
  • Growing backlash against ‘inflexible dogma’ of ESG

 


 

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

Board Transformation 2021: Leadership in Transition

There can be little doubt that the global Covid-19...

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

Digital tools proved their worth to boards during ...
EQ 2021 AGM Season report

2021 AGM Season: Successful AGMs in the Pandemic and Beyond

With the impacts of Covid-19 hitting just as the s...
Leadership in AI report

Leadership in AI 2021

This report from Board Agenda and Mazars, in assoc...
Creativity in a Crisis: a Boardroom Map for Innovation

Creativity in a Crisis: a Boardroom Map for Innovation

In the uncertain times at the height of any crisis...
Board Directors Guide to D&O Liability Insurance - November 2020 - AIG & Board Agenda

Board Directors' Guide to D&O Liability Insurance

Directors face liability over a range of new threa...
Leadership-in-Risk-Management-Board-Report

Leadership in Risk Management: Board Report

Board Agenda, in association with Mazars and INSEA...
Director's Guide to Internal Investigations

A Director's Guide to Conducting Internal Investigations

An internal investigation must be handled meticulo...

Global Business Complexity Index 2021

The Global Business Complexity Index 2021 provides...

 


 

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