SIGN UP NOW
Follow the NWC on Twitter!Follow the NWC on Facebook!

Whistleblower Scores Victory Over Justice Department Privacy Violations

On January 15, 2013 U.S. District Court Judge Robert H. Cleland issued a key ruling in support of Justice Department whistleblower Richard G. Convertino in his longstanding Privacy Act lawsuit against the DOJ. The Court ordered the Detroit Free Press to produce all documents related to how the Justice Department smeared its former star prosecutor, Richard Convertino, after Convertino exposed serous flaws in the government’s “war on terror.”   

Convertino, one of the Justice Department’s most successful prosecutors, obtained the first guilty verdicts in a post-9/11 terrorism prosecution. However, instead of lauding the Justice Department’s counterterrorism program, Convertino testified that it was fundamentally flawed and administered by incompetent and politically motivated officials. The Justice Department, led by officials appointed by former Attorney General John Ashcroft, struck back and leaked false and highly derogatory information about Convertino to the Detroit Free Press. The leak was designed to discredit Convertino before his peers and force his resignation from the Department. 

In response, Mr. Convertino filed a Privacy Act lawsuit. Although a subsequent investigation confirmed that the leak came from DOJ officials, the Justice Department has stonewalled efforts to learn who was behind the smear. 

In a key ruling, Judge Cleland has ordered the Detroit Free Press to produce all of its documents related to the “leak” and to produce a witness to testify as to the DFP’s knowledge of the DOJ source.   This order follows on the heals of a major victory for Convertino at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. On June 22, 2012, that Court ruled that Mr. Convertino was entitled to discovery in order to learn what DOJ officials illegally leaked information in retaliation for Convertino’s whistleblowing.

Mr. Convertino’s attorney, Stephen M. Kohn, issued the following statement: “The public has a right to know what official within the Justice Department willfully violated the law and illegally smeared a distinguished and highly respected prosecutor. DOJ officials are not above the law. It is the completely hypocritical that the Justice Department actively prosecutes whistleblowers whom they accuse of leaking information, but when the shoe is on the other foot, the DOJ actively cover’s up for the leakers who serve their interests.”

To learn more about Mr. Convertino listen to the show on This American Life.

District Court Decision linked here.

Appeals Court Decision linked here.

Federal Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act Becomes Law

President Barack Obama signed into law today the Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act (WPEA). Whistleblower attorneys working pro bono with the NWC played an instrumental role in passing this Act. NWC’s Executive Director Stephen Kohn testified before the Senate Homeland Security Committee and David Colapinto testified before the House Government Oversight hearing in support of the bill.

The bill contains important advances including an expanded definition of “protected disclosure” and permits whistleblowers to collect compensatory damages. Kohn and Colapinto worked for over two years to successfully block three “poison pills” that had been inserted into the law. These “poison pills” would have permitted the MSPB to summarily dismiss cases without a hearing, repealed existing protections for FBI whistleblowers and permitted the executive branch to fire whistleblowers for reporting “minor” violations of law.

“The bill contains important reforms, but federal employee still lack most of the basic rights available to whistleblowers in the private sector. We hope that President Obama and Congress will continue their efforts to ensure federal employees are fully protected during the next Congress.” Kohn said. “This is a small but meaningful step. “

Pursuant to this Act, its new provisions will become effective in thirty days. Click this link to view a copy of the WPEA.

 

This Week on Honesty Without Fear

Tune in today at 5:00pm EDT to Honesty Without Fear on Progressive Radio Network.

One of the most significant impediments for whistleblowers seeking to vindicate their rights is their inability to get lawyers to take their cases. The National Whistleblowers Center is contacted by thousands of whistleblowers a year, and most of them are unable to get any lawyer to take their case. Richard Renner spends the hour providing whistleblowers with guidance on how to sell your case to an attorney, present the key facts that may interest a lawyer in taking on your case, ask the right questions, and get the attention your case deserves.

Submit Your Question to be asked on air during the show or call in to 1-888-874-4888.

 

Missed last week's episode?? You can listen to the podcast.

This Week on Honesty Without Fear

Tune in today at 5:00pm EDT to Honesty Without Fear on Progressive Radio Network.

In the first half, Lindsey Williams and Richard Renner talk about whistleblower news, how whistleblowers can get legal assistance and answer your questions.

In the second half hour, Richard Renner and OSHA whistleblower Gregg Stoerrle tackle the question of why the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) whistleblower law is the worst federal whistleblower law. Richard explains what health and safety whistleblowers can do to protect their rights without using OSHA and what legislative fixes are in the works.

Submit Your Question to be asked on air during the show or call in to 1-888-874-4888.

 

Missed last week's episode?? You can listen to the podcast.

This Week on Honesty Without Fear

Tune in today at 1:00pm EDT to Honesty Without Fear on Progressive Radio Network.

In the first half, Michael Kohn interviews Army Corps of Engineer whistleblower Tommie Savage. Ms. Savage is a former contract specialist who dared to question massive government contract fraud. She was fired for bringing the fraud to light and, her case is still ongoing. Tune in to hear her story.

In the second half hour, Lindsey Williams and attorney Sharon Eubanks discuss her new book Bad Acts: The Racketeering Case Against the Tobacco Industry. Ms. Eubanks spent the last six years of her 22 years as an attorney with the Department of Justice taking on the tobacco industry. They discuss the case and the difficulties of going up against corporations with almost limitless resources.

Submit Your Question to be asked on air during the show or call in to 1-888-874-4888.

 

Missed last week's episode?? You can listen to the podcast.

NWC Applauds First SEC Whistleblower Award

Under a new program championed by the National Whistleblowers Center (NWC) to reduce securities fraud, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) today announced its first whistleblower award of nearly $50,000.

The SEC's announcement is the mark of success for its new Whistleblower Program, which was established one year ago after passage of the Dodd-Frank Act. During the Dodd-Frank rule-making process, the SEC approved a variety of proposals made by the NWC that encourage whistleblowers to step forward.

Specifically, NWC proposed incentives for employees who report wrongdoing internally and rewards for employees whether they choose to file their whistleblower claims with the company or with the government.

Today’s award recognizes the contributions of a whistleblower who wishes to remain anonymous. The whistleblower provided original information leading to over $1 million in sanctions. An official quoted in the SEC press release stated that if the whistleblower had not stepped forward, “it is very likely that many more investors would have been victimized.”

Stephen M. Kohn, Executive Director of the National Whistleblowers Center, made the following statement: 

This is a major step forward. The SEC Whistleblower Program is demonstrating that it works quickly and effectively to deter fraud. Whistleblowers are the number one resource for detecting fraud, and every agency can learn from the SEC's successful Whistleblower Program. Today’s announcement sends a simple message to securities fraudsters: beware. My hat is off to the SEC for protecting investors.

 
Although this first award is modest, the statute mandates that whistleblowers receive 10-30% of the recovery as a reward. Future awards to whistleblowers will therefore increase as the SEC recoveries increase. 

Why Retaliation is a Company "Felony"

By Guest Columnist: Donna Boehme
Principal at Compliance Strategists LLC and editor of the weekly CS Newsflash (and former chief compliance and ethics officer at two leading multinationals). Follow her on Twitter @DonnaCBoehme.

“One way or another, I'm gonna find ya' I'm gonna get ya', get ya', get ya', get ya' “
- Blondie circa 1978

There’s a reason why that Blondie song is #305 on Rolling Stone’s 500 Greatest Songs of All Time. It appeals to a very basic human emotion: getting even. Retaliation is an ugly thing. In the workplace, it’s also a powerful and complex individual and team-based behavior that is difficult to identify and even harder to stamp out. Typically employed to punish workers who report a problem, challenge the status quo or otherwise “rock the boat,” it goes to the very heart of organizational culture. And that’s why it should be viewed, not as a misdemeanor referenced briefly in the code of conduct, but as a company felony in the arena of compliance and ethical leadership.

It’s relatively easy in the “balloons and barbeques” stage of program rollout for managers to vocally support “doing the right thing,” support employee ethics training, and even throw in an “integrity moment” here and there in team meetings. Bravo, and noted. But calamity is the real test of integrity. It’s the more difficult circumstances – an investigation into misconduct, or a team member questioning modus operandi- that truly test the mettle of supervisors. (This is why more enlightened organizations understand that, with rare exception, ethical managers and supervisors are not born, but trained - and then they reinforce those ethical leadership behaviors with meaningful financial and nonfinancial incentives …. but I digress.) This is the stage where those managers who have not gotten the memo (literally and figuratively) can revert to their basic human instinct to seek and destroy.

Retaliation is a company felony because it works like a cancer on the culture of the organization. It is the opposite of transparency and accountability. It not only punishes those trying to do the right thing, but broadcasts a clear message to others around them that “this is what happens to those who get out of line.” Employees are nothing if not observant to every nuance of their supervisor’s words and action. Every act of direct or indirect retaliation reverberates in the halls and around the water cooler 100 times more loudly than any CEO letter touting integrity. When a company leader retaliates, whatever advances have been made in the “balloons and barbeques” stage of the program in that part of the organization vanish like the wind, and are replaced by fear and blame.

Retaliation is a cancer that also acts like a communicable disease. A leader who sets the tone of fear and retaliation can often count on others within the team to help reinforce the group dynamic against the disfavored team member. [1]   The disease can also move from team to team and spread throughout other areas of the organization, crushing out competing efforts to encourage transparency, accountability and ethical culture. Role modeling can be a powerful force for either good or evil.

At a recent RAND Symposium on ethical culture, David Gebler, author of “The Three Power Values” made some insightful observations about organizational culture, including leadership actions that must be mobilized to stop the slippery slope of bad culture before it becomes the norm. On the flip side, retaliation is a leadership action that actually hastens the slippery slope and enables misconduct, because it fosters fear, silence and acquiescence. That’s the lesson of Enron & WorldCom 101.

One question I ask when evaluating company programs is “How many times have you fired someone for retaliation?” You’d be surprised how many companies have never found an act of retaliation within their ranks, or alternatively, actually fired a manager for the offense. Workplace retaliation isn’t always spelled out in black and white as an outright dismissal or demotion. That would be easy. Often, it manifests more indirectly, such as exclusion from important meetings or discussions, change of workload, lack of cooperation, social ostracism and malicious gossip. These are harder to pinpoint and requires a committed management that condemns it and the vigilance of trained HR, legal and compliance personnel – factors missing in many organizations.

Another useful question is “What is your implementation plan for monitoring and enforcing the nonretaliation policy?” Organizations that are serious about compliance and ethics not only make retaliation a major offense, but actually have protocols and mechanics in place to ensure team leaders understand and comply. Do managers believe they will be disciplined for retaliation against a team member? Do investigators routinely warn supervisors during investigations that the team may be audited for retaliation? How carefully does the company enforce a “need to know” list? Is there a retaliation monitoring program? [2]  Again, the answer to these questions is often …. crickets.

All this suggests that boards and senior management who are quick to proclaim the ethical culture of the company as their priority should pay much closer attention to seeking out and punishing retaliation as the number one force undermining that lofty goal. Retaliation is a company felony and should be treated accordingly, with swift and consistent public punishment for the perpetrators, no matter how senior. That’s also reason #487 why the chief compliance officer and her team must have the independence, positioning and empowerment to address retaliation wherever and however it manifests, and to otherwise implement and oversee the critical elements of an effective compliance program. [3]

A true ethical culture reflects the better instincts of company leadership, and retaliation does the opposite. One way or another, retaliation must be met with purpose and vigor, and eradicated.


[1] See my related column on an ATF official’s warning to agency employees to “respect the chain of command.” 

[2] Vicki Sweeney, partner-in-charge of KPMG’s ethics and compliance group, has developed a leading edge retaliation monitoring program

[3] See RAND Symposium on “Perspectives of Chief Ethics and Compliance Officers on the Detection and Prevention of Corporate Misdeeds” (2009) and “From Enron to Madoff: Why Most Corporate Compliance and Ethics Programs are Positioned for Failure” (2009)
 

This Week on Honesty Without Fear

Tune in tomorrow at 1:00pm EDT to Honesty Without Fear on Progressive Radio Network.
  
In the first half hour, Jane Turner interviews whistleblower Justin Hopson about his recently released book Breaking the Blue Wall: One Man's War Against Police Corruption. During his first days as a New Jersey State Trooper, Mr. Hopson witnessed an unlawful arrest and false report made by his training officer. When he refused to testify in support of the illegal arrest, he suffered severe harassment from a secret society within the State Police know as the "Lords of Discipline." For decades, The Lords' mission was to keep troopers in line. Mr. Hopson stood up to decades of silencing and sparked the largest internal investigation in State Police history. Listen to Jane and Mr. Hopson discuss his journey as a whistleblower.

In the second half hour, Richard Renner discusses a sweeping new pro-whistleblower decision by the Department of Labor with attorney Daniel Corey of the Sensible Law Institute. Attorney Corey represents Thomas Spinner who was fired for blowing the whistle on internal control problems at New York City's largest owner of office buildings, SL Green. The question in Mr. Spinner's case was whether the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) would protect him because he was fired by one of SL Green's contractors – not by SL Green. On May 31, 2012, the Department of Labor's Administrative Review Board (ARB) explicitly rejected the holding of the First Circuit in Lawson v. FMR, LLC and held that SOX does in fact protect the employees of contractors. Tune in to hear how this will affect workers in the future.

Submit Your Question to be asked on air during the show or call in to 1-888-874-4888.

 

Missed last week's episode?? You can listen to the podcast.

This Week on Honesty Without Fear

Tune in today at 1:00pm EDT to Honesty Without Fear on Progressive Radio Network.

In the first half hour, whistleblower Robert Whitmore speaks with Richard Renner about the landmark decision in his case last week. Mr. Whitmore's 37-year career with the Department of Labor came to an end after he disclosed how OSHA accepted impossibly low industry reports of worker injuries and illnesses. Last week, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that Mr. Whitmore did not get a fair hearing from the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB).

In the second half hour, Richard interviews Mr. Whitmore's attorney, Paula Dinerstein of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER). Ms. Dinerstein shares her experience in pursuing Mr. Whitmore's case when so few whistleblowers were winning cases at either the MSPB or the Federal Circuit. She also shares her analysis of the Mr. Whitmore's Federal Circuit decision, including what means for whistleblowers, their advocates, federal managers, and the MSPB.

 
Submit Your Question to be asked on air during the show or call in to 1-888-874-4888.

 

Missed last week's episode?? You can listen to the podcast.

NWC Demands Immediate Release of FDA Spying Documents

Last week, the National Whistleblowers Center filed a motion for preliminary injunction under the Freedom of Information Act in U.S. District Court in DC. The motion has been filed in order to get the FDA to release all documents pertaining to their illegal surveillance of employees’ private email correspondence. NWC has a limited number of documents that show the FDA conducted special targeted monitoring of employees who blew the whistle on misconduct and inappropriate approvals of unsafe medical devices. The FDA activated spyware on whistleblowers’ work computers to spy on their password protected Gmail-to-Gmail correspondences to Congress, the Office of Special Counsel and other oversight authorities.

According to Lindsey Williams, Director of Advocacy and Development for the National Whistleblowers centre, “It is critical that the FDA immediately release the documents related to their illegal spying program. The program has created a chilling effect throughout the federal government. Federal employees must feel free to report their concerns to Congress and OSC.”

As per preliminary injunction rules, the judge must hold a hearing within the next 20 days and rule shortly there after.

 

*Abisola Ojikutu (a NWC intern) drafted this posting