Whistleblower Protection Blog : Whistleblower Lawyer & Attorney : National Whistleblower Legal Defense and Education Fund : Whistleblower Protection, Fraud Claims : Washington DC

Today, President Obama signed the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (H.R. 2571), which contains landmark whistleblower protections for food safety employees.

Highlights of the Food Safety Whistleblower Provision:

•   Covers all employers "engaged in the manufacture, processing, packing, transportation, distribution, reception, holding or importation of food;"
• Allows workers have their case heard before a jury in federal court;
• Provides for reinstatement, back pay and compensatory damages.

I issued the following statement in a press release by the National Whistleblowers Center:

The Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) will save American lives by protecting the millions of American workers who grow, process, store and deliver our food. Those workers now have modern whistleblower protections when they raise concerns about the safety of our food.

It is important for working people to know that all legal claims have time limits. The time limit under FMSA to file a written complaint with OSHA is 180 days. For raising concerns about toxic chemicals, though, the time limit is still 30 days. Whistleblowers usually get better results when they work with an attorney experienced in employment discrimination law.

The FMSA fills an important loophole left by the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA) in 2008. CPSIA does not cover food or medical devices. FMSA is the first law to provide whistleblower protections for workers covered by regulations of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). While tainted food kills about 5,000 Americans a year, medications may kill as many as 100,000 Americans every year. Yet Congress has not extended whistleblower coverage to workers who raise concerns about violations of the FDA's pharmaceutical regulations.

It is time to end the patchwork protection of whistleblowers and pass a law that protects all workers when they raise concerns about health, safety, fraud, illegality, and dangers to the environment.

 Jason Zuckerman has written an excellent guide to the FSMA whistleblower protection. I previously commented on the FSMA and its place in our patchwork in this blog.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Yesterday the U.S. Senate passed the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA), S. 510. It passed with strong bipartisan support.  The final vote was 73 to 25. My friend Jason Zuckerman has written a detailed analysis of FSMA's new whistleblower protection. Those who need the details about the scope and legal requirements for FSMA whistleblower claims should read Jason's analysis.

The FSMA follows in a series of whistleblower protections created when Congress confronts a serious problem. Six federal environmental laws created whistleblower protections with the rise of the environmental movement. Other laws followed to protect truck drivers, nuclear power workers, airline pilots, corporate accountants, pipeline workers, and those who raise concerns about the safety of consumer products. Thus, we have a "patchwork" of protections as each new law covers another slice of America's workers. The advantage of patchwork legislation is that whistleblowers benefit from each wave of public concern over some danger. If the danger actually kills people, that is all the more motive for legislators to show that they are doing something significant. Notice, though, that while tainted food kills about 5,000 Americans a year, so do workplace safety and health dangers. Yet the Senate has taken no action to modernize Section 11(c) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSH Act).  Medications may kill as many as 100,000 Americans every year (here's another cite), yet the Senate has not extended whistleblower coverage to workers who raise concerns about violations of the FDA's pharmaceutical regulations. The Chamber of Commerce and Big Pharma remain too formidable for legislators to challenge with the prospect of meaningful whistleblower protection. This is the disadvantage of patchwork legislation. Perhaps someday legislators will join together in agreement that all whistleblowers, in both the public and private sectors, should have gold-standard whistleblower protections whenever they raise any concerns about illegality, fraud, or dangers to the public safety.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link