Missouri bill would limit whistleblower protections

WES DUPLANTIER, Associated Press

Sunday, April 22, 2012

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. (AP) — About a month after Democratic Gov. Jay Nixon vetoed changes to Missouri's workplace discrimination law, Republicans lawmakers are pushing a pair of scaled-back measures that could make it more difficult for workers to seek legal protection for reporting wrongdoing by their employers.

In March, Nixon vetoed legislation that would have required workers who bring wrongful termination lawsuits to prove discrimination was a motivating factor — not simply a contributing factor— in the employer's action. If an employer were to wrongfully discriminate, the legislation would have capped the amount of punitive damages a plaintiff could recover at $300,000 or less, depending on the size of their former employer.

Leaders in the Republican-controlled House and Senate have conceded they don't have enough votes to override Nixon's action. Instead, the GOP is putting forward two bills that narrow who is eligible for whistleblower protection, when whistleblowers could win a lawsuit against their employer and how much money they could recover.

Nixon's veto message focused mainly on the parts of the original legislation that related to workplace discrimination, though he did take issue with that measure's whistleblower provisions, saying they would discourage people from reporting wrongdoing at the workplace.

But the GOP has pressed forward on the new bills, which have been endorsed by a House workforce development committee and could be taken up by the full chamber in the coming weeks.

A "whistleblower" is someone who reports wrongdoing at his or her place of employment. People who make such reports are often given protections to ensure that they are not the target of retaliation from their employers. Missouri does not have an official whistleblower law. Instead, the state's courts have decided who can sue and how much they can recover based on previous case law.

The new bills would limit "whistleblower" status to someone who reports an act at their workplace that is illegal or that clearly violates the state's "public policy" as expressed in its constitution, laws, rules and regulations. In order to qualify, the employee would have to make a report directly to a government agency, law enforcement or the company's human resources department.

A worker also could qualify for whistleblower protections if he or she refused to carry out a direct order from an employer that would break the law.

In a similar fashion to the vetoed workplace discrimination legislation, the new measures would require workers who bring lawsuits alleging that they were fired because of their whistleblower status to prove that was a motivating factor in their employer's action. It would similarly cap the damages they could recover.

Sen. Brad Lager, the sponsor of the Senate version of the workplace discrimination bill, said the original measure was aimed at protecting employers from frivolous lawsuits and making the state more business-friendly. He said that passing the new whistleblower measure would represent at least partial progress toward that goal and that lawmakers may try to pass a discrimination measure again next year.

"If the majority of the Republican caucus in the Senate feels that this is something worth doing, then we'll move forward," said Lager, R-Savannah, of the new bills. "The frustrating part for me is the (discrimination) provisions that have been taken out. Those issues are still important. Those problems still exist. Those challenges are not going away."

Among those opposed to the new measure is St. Louis attorney Jerome Dodson, who said its limitations on what qualifies as a wrongful act could make it difficult for an employee to decide whether he or she should report an employer in the first place.

"I believe it will have an enormous chilling effect upon employees," Dodson said.

Whistleblower bills are HB2099 and SB592.

Online:

Legislature: http://www.moga.mo.gov

More like this story

FussyOno 1 year ago

"Missouri bill would limit whistleblower protections" "A "whistleblower" is someone who reports wrongdoing at his or her place of employment."

So The GOP in Missouri is for hiding and protecting wrongdoing and illegal activity if it's an employer. That is what I infer from this article, as a wrongful termination lawsuit is the only protection a worker has when they are wrongfully dismissed for doing the right thing. If they blow the whistle and then are fired then it should be up to the company to prove that wasn't the reason. And the settlement in such cases should remain a decision of the people, a jury, and not the legislators. They are making too many laws anyway. I don't care if Missouri is more business friendly. I want to see more consumer and employee protection.

JCLifer 1 year ago

I want to see some improvements to the economy and get some good-paying jobs in Missouri.

The legislator is so out of touch with the people they serve.

tonto_goldberg 1 year ago

We should be rewarding whistle-blowers. Why would it make sense to protect business criminals? This proposal has the stench of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) all over it.

spelchek 1 year ago

Man, has BHO done a job on some of you. How about most business that you patronize on a daily basis obey the law and give back to the community in jobs, taxes, donations, etc... Most business owners/creators already take many risks and spend money on lawyers/accountants to keep up with law, after law, after law to make sure they're in compliance. I too, would be enticed by a state that says build here and if you make a mistake that someone intends to cash in on, we'll cap it so you don't lose everything. I understand bad guys, but they come from the rank and file just as easy as the ones at the top. I have no issue with protecting the jobs of those who bring wrong doing to light; however, if done without ulterior motives the employer and employee should see eye to eye. In the case of those like Solyndra and Enron, run and don't look back; your job won't be there to protect anyway.

JMO 1 year ago

Maybe I'm naive, but what else would you report?

tonto_goldberg 1 year ago

I think the right-wing nuts are convinced that someone could sue their former employer and win lots of money if they looked at him cross-eyed. Clearly, reality is not a part of the right-wing orthodoxy.

JCLifer 1 year ago

How about amending the proposed law to remove all employee liability from work that his/her employer asks them to do that is illegal or that clearly violates the state's "public policy" as expressed in its constitution, laws, rules and regulations?

If employers didn't demand that their workers violate the law, perhaps there would be less need for whistle-blowers.

asb 1 year ago

Ignorance is a common excuse, but seldom a valid reason for regulatory non-compliance. The reason is greed.

seeno 1 year ago

Sept. 2008 the year Lehman Brothers collasped. Likely the largest bankruptcy in history. 26,000 people lost their jobs, millions lost all or most of their money, and it created a chain-reaction that caused the worst economic downturn since the depression. We are still living through this disaster nearly 4years later. (Which also explains why so many people are unemployed including young college graduates). A man named Matthew Lee attempted to bring attention to their bogus accounting in 2007. He was fired from Lehman Brothers and is still unemployed to this day. Not one person has ever been prosecuted. The corporations take no responsibility for their actions and the tax payers(the employees of these corporations) (the whistleblower)have to take responsibilty and bail out these leeches who are abusing the system. When will the taxpayer(employees) (whistleblowers) get justice and proper representation from our elected officials? "Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely". " The surest way for evil to triumph is for good people to do nothing"

Sequoia 1 year ago

Privatize gains. Socialize losses. The American business system!

Please review our Policies and Procedures before registering or commenting

Or login with:

OpenID

News Tribune