Inadequate and Inappropriate Legal, Financial, and Moral Support
Blowing the whistle against an organization could likewise create a negative impact in the operation of its business. Some laws require that an employee should first put it on record that he has reported the problem to the company and has given his employer the chance to rectify the problem without having to go public, since both parties suffer from the consequences.
As a whistleblower, you should bear in mind that it is not just a matter of telling on your employer but also a matter of planning and organizing your actions in terms of support, including financial, legal, and moral. Otherwise, your would-be opponent will take advantage of any insufficiency or lack on your part and ignore your issues or concerns.
A university professor filed a gender discrimination claim against certain individuals associated with the university. However, some points of the case did not prosper for lack of sufficient and material evidence; hence the court’s summary judgment was for the defendants to pay the professor a certain amount as reimbursement for cost of attorney’s fees and other legal expenses. Thereafter the university professor filed another lawsuit claiming for damages against acts of retaliation based on her previous lawsuit for gender discrimination.
The professor claimed she was unduly harassed by the university by not being awarded with sufficient salary increases. She likewise claimed that the university manipulated the students into filing complaints against her, which she purported as having stemmed from the university’s acts of depriving her of other services. However, based on a preliminary hearing, the professor’s subsequent claim for anti-retaliation lacked merit. Her allegations of gender discrimination within the university was not proven true due to lack of sufficient and material evidence that constituted gender discrimination. Besides, there was no element of fraud to qualify her previous lawsuit as a whistleblowing act subjected to retaliatory action in the workplace.
In addition, the professor made further claims that the amount of reimbursement for attorney’s damages awarded to her by the previous court was not enough to cover her actual costs. The court likewise dismissed this claim because the court stated that the professor had no jurisdiction to decide how much attorney’s fees should be awarded as reimbursement.