Reply #3: Indeed! A person doesn't even qualify for 'protection' ... [View All]

[TahitiNut]

... as a 'whistle-blower' unless they've formally reported actual (not perceived) wrongdoing to an outside regulatory or enforcement agency. All employers, including government, steadfastly proclaims that such reports should be made internally first, supposedly to permit the organization's in-place management to review and correct the problem before being 'embarrassed' by some outside agency. "Team players" will accommodate this management direction - which often only offers management a chance to terminate the boat-rocker before they get any kind of legal coverage. If anybody was really serious about protecting whistle-blowers, the laws would be given teeth and far, far greater coverage of people making such complaints. Instead, even their co-workers treat them as lepers - fearing "guilt by association."

Oh, and it's NOT 'protection' - it's only a 'cause of action' and the plaintiff not only must prove their qualification and prove the 'cause of action' but must prove the direct and substantiatable economic harm for any kind of compensation - and future harms are not accommodated. When a person's career is effectively exterminated, they have life-long penalties for which there's no relief.