Whistleblowing cases on the rise in UK’s employment tribunal system

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

Roula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.

In his job at Cornwall Air Ambulance Trust, Steve Murdoch worked well with paramedics and fundraising staff on everything from opening a charity shop to hooking up helicopters with blood bags.

But when the charity hired a new head in 2021, he began to ask questions about his soon-to-be boss’s credentials.

Murdoch said he was worried about the process that led to the recruitment of the new chief executive, including misstatements on the successful applicant’s CV. He felt inaccuracies about a previous job title and fundraising figures were used to secure “a highly paid job at the top of a charity with access to millions of pounds”.

When he attempted to sound the alarm to some trustees, Murdoch said he felt threatened and intimidated as a whistleblower and was forced out of his job. Still frustrated that the charity was not addressing the issue, he filed an employment tribunal claim. He endured a cross-examination in front of a judge before receiving a positive judgment and confidential settlement sum.

Murdoch’s case is one of a growing number of whistleblowing incidents ending up in the employment tribunal. Experts say the rise of legal claims shows that awareness about whistleblowing is increasing. But it also suggests a more worrying trend: that those who blow the whistle are facing serious repercussions in the workplace — and that the issues they are exposing are not being dealt with properly.

The annual number of claims involving public interest disclosures — or whistleblowing — in the tribunal system increased by 92 per cent between 2015 and 2023. Cases that involve detriment or dismissal as a result of public disclosure have also grown as a proportion of the total cases in the heavily backlogged tribunal.

Dr Jayne Chidgey-Clark, National Guardian for the Freedom to Speak Up for NHS England, said UK workplaces were experiencing a whistleblowing culture shift, driven in part by high-profile cases including the former nurse Lucy Letby, the broader #MeToo movement and the Post Office scandal. An employee who raises an official public interest concern — whether related to safeguarding, financial misconduct or poor work conditions — is meant to receive legal protections to prevent retribution.

But Chidgey-Clark is concerned the issues raised by whistleblowing are being moved to tribunal rather than being taken up by workplaces. Employers are cracking down on whistleblowers instead of engaging with the disclosure itself.

“A case ends up in a tribunal because the internal processes haven’t gone well,” she explained. “It’s obviously gone horribly wrong both for the individual and for the organisation.” While tribunals may remedy unfair treatment, the drawn-out process is stressful for claimants and the judge does not have the remit to investigate problems the whistleblower raised.

The judge in Murdoch’s case, for example, could not assess the validity of his claims — or demand the ambulance trust address them. The Cornwall Air Ambulance Trust said its trustee board had “carefully studied” the tribunal’s findings and “implemented a number of changes as a result”.

There may be another reason for the increase in whistleblower claims at tribunal. Some solicitors believe the rise in cases is a sign that run-of-the-mill employee grievances are being elevated to whistleblowing claims.

Vanessa James, employment law partner at Trowers & Hamlins, noted that protected disclosures gave employees rights and leverage they would not otherwise have. Employees can bring whistleblowing cases to tribunal from their first day in the job, whereas grievances such as unfair dismissal can only be raised after two years of employment.

“There is a tendency to try and find whistleblowing in a situation where they haven’t got other rights,” James said. “It doesn’t mean they’re not a whistleblower, it just means it’s something that they might not otherwise have used.” Unlike other claims, whistleblowing also has no maximum compensation award “and if it’s something that an employer is embarrassed about then it’s more likely to result in a higher settlement”.

Andrew Pepper-Parsons, director of policy at the whistleblowing charity Protect, is sceptical that claimants are using protected disclosures as a legal gambit. “The law is stacked against the whistleblower,” he said. Those who blow the whistle still face resistance in the tribunal.

There are signs a new government could change the UK’s whistleblowing landscape. Labour has flagged it would make unfair dismissals a day-one right. Foreign secretary David Lammy has advocated for improved incentives — including monetary rewards — for those speaking up on financial crime.

For now, though, whistleblowers such as Murdoch are left without a job, and forced to grapple with the judicial system.