Search Site
Menu
Appeals Court Clarification Strengthens Whistleblower Protections for Federal Employees

The recent U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decision in Miller v. Department of Justice offered some clarification as to the standard for how to determine if an agency met its responsibility under the Whistleblower Protection Act to demonstrate it would have taken the same action with its personnel in the absence of the employee’s protected whistleblowing act.

The plaintiff in the case, Troy Miller, worked as a superintendent of industries at a Texas prison, overseeing a factory in the prison that produced ballistic helmets. In October 2009, Miller reported what he believed to be mismanagement of the factory’s funds. In December 2009, the DOJ’s Office of the Inspector General (OIG) visited the factory to conduct an investigation. The OIG requested Miller’s superior to tell him not to work that day so the staff would not feel uncomfortable by the presence of the superintendent during the inspection.

The next day, Miller claimed someone had placed rejected material on the production line as a form of sabotage, and he requested a closing of the factory until the incident could be investigated. Just hours later, Miller was informed he was being reassigned and no longer held his position. He was repeatedly reassigned over the next four-and-a-half years to menial jobs, and eventually filed a suit claiming he was retaliated against.

Court decision reaffirms whistleblower protection

In siding with Miller, the court reaffirms and strengthens the idea that employers must be able to prove they would have taken the same action — in this case, the alleged retaliation — regardless of the employee’s whistleblowing act. Evidence includes the motive for retaliation and a record of how the employer has handled non-whistleblowers in similar situations.

There are now more protections available to whistleblowers than ever before, but these individuals still face some significant risks, including retaliation from their employers. For further guidance, contact a skilled Dallas attorney at Whistleblower Law for Managers.

Honors
Our Office
  • Dallas Office
    4514 Cole Ave
    #600
    Dallas, Texas 75205
    Phone: 214-306-8045
    Fax: 469-729-9926
Testimonials
  • "Steve Kardell was terrific in representing me in some very adversarial discussions with Citigroup and also later represented me in my testimony before the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission."  -Richard Bowen, Citigroup Whistleblower

  • "Never thought my career would end like it did after 30 years of service. I was part of the first round of the so called reduction of force. I asked myself how can I be part of this with 30 years of seniority. How did they pick these 90 plus employees? Now, the culture of this organization made you question every decision they made. It wasn’t what you knew it’s was a culture of who you know. Nonetheless, I did not accept their severance package. I immediately starting looking for an attorney who would take on my case. After the initial call to Steve I had hope again. He was open and honest about everything and reassured me he would do his best for me, and he did. I had an awesome outcome. Thanks Steve you’re the best."  -S.S.

  • "Reaching out to Steve Kardell was the best decision I made. His ability to provide immediate insight and direction was very powerful, and a huge relief during a very stressful time period. For anyone struggling with a whistleblower situation, I would highly recommend at least speaking with Steve. After a 10 minute call with him, I had a better understanding of what I was dealing with. Even better, he gave me some immediate hope. In the end Steve did a better job than I thought was possible. Steve was able to get in contact with people in my organization, that I didn’t have access to. Because of his years of experience, he already has contacts in many organizations in Dallas. The entire situation was handled peacefully. I was impressed by his ability to “keep the peace”–rather than creating a battle with the organization. The reason I didn’t reach out to a lawyer initially, was because I thought it would mean an immediate end to any hope of a positive relationship with the company. Steve was able to address my concerns, and in the end I was able to continue to work for them."  -KS

FOLLOW US
Facebook Twitter Linkedin RSS Feed JD Supra