SOX Whistleblower Protection Still Important Remedy in Wake of Berman v. Neo@Ogilvy

The recent Berman v. Neo@Ogilvy case showed us that the whistleblower protections afforded in the Sarbanes-Oxley Act are still extremely important and relevant, despite many predictions that the whistleblower provision of the Dodd-Frank Act would make them obsolete.

Claims under SOX remain an excellent remedy for whistleblowers who have been victims of retaliation in the workplace. Here are some of the most important reasons you might consider filing a SOX claim:

• For the most part, federal courts have adopted the U.S. Department of Labor Administrative Review Board’s overall construction of protected conduct under SOX, and hold that SOX covers certain disclosures related to potential SEC rule violations.
• All SOX claims are exempt from having to go through mandatory arbitration procedures.
• SOX whistleblowers have a lesser burden of proof than whistleblowers in many other types of claims. They only are required to show that protected conduct “tended to affect” the ultimate result of the noted adverse action in any way.
• Under SOX, whistleblowers have access to uncapped compensation. A number of recent jury verdicts would indicate SOX whistleblowers could recover some significant damages for reputational harm and emotional distress.
• There is a heavy burden of proof on the employer to support a same-decision affirmative defense.
• Exhausting all of the available administrative remedies may offer key early discovery opportunities and result in preliminary reinstatement.

SOX whistleblower claims remain effective

Thus, despite what you might have heard, there are still plenty of reasons why anti-retaliation claims Sarbanes-Oxley Act are still relevant. For more information and sound legal guidance on these issues, consult a trusted Dallas attorney with Whistleblower Law for Managers.