Fairly and Justly? Are Employment Tribunals Able to Even Out Whistleblowing Power Imbalances?

Abstract

In Britain, Employment Tribunals (ET) adjudicate on whistleblowing legislation. They do so with the overriding aim to adjudicate cases fairly and justly, by hearing parties on an equal footing. This paper presents research questioning this rule-of-law assumption vis-a-vis power imbalances that relate to whistleblowing. Using multinomial logistic regression analysis, we analyse all cases at ET in England and Wales between 2015 and 2018, that included a whistleblowing claim and that went to preliminary hearing or beyond. We find that several variables have an effect on the relative representational strength (RRS) at ET, but not on the outcome of the whistleblowing claim. However, whistleblowing claims brought in combination of discrimination claims (41%) have lower RRS and less favourable outcomes for the whistleblowing claim.

A Story About Speaking Up: Mediation Effects of Narrative Persuasion on Organizational Voice Intentions

“…When employees’ assessments of whether their verbal input “serves to improve the status quo” (Burris et al, 2013, p. 23) differs from their managers’, the employees’ performance ratings suffer. Whistleblowers who speak up about organizational wrongdoing often face retaliation and suffer from stress (William & Vandekerckhove, 2021). Even when delivered with purely constructive intent, this kind of voice behavior is often construed negatively.…”