Retaliation for whistleblowing: some case studies on the experience of re-employment/redeployment

Purpose – Courts and tribunals seem to have little knowledge about what factors make re-employment practicable. This paper aims to demonstrate that the re-employment/redeployment of whistleblowers may well be “successful” in a wide range of circumstances.
Design/methodology/approach – Interviewees were identified via a direct call to organisations involved in advising or representing whistleblowers. Covid restrictions at the time (March–April 2021) prevented case study interviews being conducted in person, so Zoom interviews were carried out.
Findings – The “success” of re-employment/ redeployment was associated with the following factors: the individual returned to the same job with a different boss or at a different location; the concern raised was dealt with; there had been judicial involvement by way of mediation and/or adjudication; that lawyers were used as representatives; that most returnees were not financially worse off; that the individual had the support of family, friends and colleagues and were willing to get the press or other media involved.
Research limitations/implications – As the findings are based on 11 interviews arising from snowball sampling, it goes without saying that they cannot be considered representative, and more extensive research is needed to check their validity. It should also be noted that the positive views expressed about re- employment/redeployment may reflect the fact that those who had more negative experiences of returning to work were less likely to volunteer to be interviewed. The author believes that this research demonstrates that a phenomenological approach can provide important insights into the highly complex nature of both retaliation for whistleblowing and any re-employment/ redeployment that ensures.
Practical implications – That factors could be identified, which might be associated with “successful” re- employment/ redeployment, has implications for both legal and human resource practitioners and perhaps for a wider society that believes those who suffer a wrong should have a say in the remedy that they are afforded.
Originality/value – To the author’s knowledge, almost no research has been carried out into the experiences of whistleblowers who have been reemployed/redeployed following retaliation for raising concerns.

This an author submitted manuscript that has not been peer-reviewed. This is the pre-peer reviewed version of an article, which has been published in final form at https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLMA-10-2021-0244 by Emerald Publishing Limited