Personnel Today
  • OHW+
  • Join
  • Resources
    • Clinical governance
    • Disability
    • Ergonomics
    • Health surveillance
    • OH employment law
    • OH service delivery
    • Research
    • Return to work and rehabilitation
    • Sickness absence management
    • Wellbeing and health promotion
  • Conditions
    • Mental health
    • Musculoskeletal disorders
    • Blood pressure
    • Cancer
    • Cardiac
    • Dementia
    • Diabetes
    • Respiratory
    • Stroke
  • CPD
  • Webinars
  • OHW Awards
  • Jobs
  • Personnel Today

Personnel Today

Register
Log in
Personnel Today
  • OHW+
  • Join
  • Resources
    • Clinical governance
    • Disability
    • Ergonomics
    • Health surveillance
    • OH employment law
    • OH service delivery
    • Research
    • Return to work and rehabilitation
    • Sickness absence management
    • Wellbeing and health promotion
  • Conditions
    • Mental health
    • Musculoskeletal disorders
    • Blood pressure
    • Cancer
    • Cardiac
    • Dementia
    • Diabetes
    • Respiratory
    • Stroke
  • CPD
  • Webinars
  • OHW Awards
  • Jobs
  • Personnel Today

Health and safetyCase lawWhistleblowing

Morgan v Royal Mencap Society: Protected disclosure in public interest

by Naomi Clarkson 2 Jun 2016
by Naomi Clarkson 2 Jun 2016

In Morgan v Royal Mencap Society, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) held that an employment tribunal was wrong to strike out a whistleblowing claim on the basis that an employee’s complaint about cramped working conditions was not “in the public interest”. Naomi Clarkson explains this recent employment case.

Whistleblowing

Whistleblowing policy

Whistleblowing: good practice

Whistleblowing: line manager briefing

Morgan v Royal Mencap Society

Background

Whistleblowers are protected against dismissal and detriment on the basis of making a qualifying “protected disclosure”.

This case centres on the issue of the “public interest” provisions of the Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998, which were introduced into the legislation in June 2013.

The “public interest” test requires the worker to reasonably believe that their disclosure on one of the relevant matters is made in the public interest.

The purpose of these changes was to reverse the findings of previous case law that had extended whistleblowing protection to workers seeking to make disclosures in their own personal interest, effectively covering a breach of a whistleblower’s own contract of employment.

The reforms sparked controversy, with some workers’ organisations claiming that the public interest requirement placed too high a burden on workers and that they may be deterred from seeking the protection of the legislation.

This case is the latest in a number of recent decisions to consider the meaning of “in the public interest”.

Facts

Ms Morgan claimed that she had been subjected to detriments because of her public interest disclosures and complaints about health and safety.

The disclosures relied on were complaints that Ms Morgan had made to management about cramped working conditions.

She complained that the conditions were adversely affecting her injured knee and causing her discomfort.

Key cases on the “public interest” test

Chesterton Global Ltd (t/a Chestertons) and another v Nurmohamed

Underwood v Wincanton plc

Newman v Riverside Building Supplies Ltd

EAT decision

The EAT concluded that the employment tribunal was wrong to strike out Ms Morgan’s whistleblowing complaint at a preliminary hearing because the employee had no prospects of successfully showing that she reasonably believed her complaint about her cramped working conditions was in the public interest.

The EAT decided that the public interest issue could be determined only after consideration of all of the evidence at a substantive hearing.

Implications for employers

Despite the widely held belief that the “public interest” test would generally exclude claims relating to employees’ personal interests, both this case and previous decisions suggest that the opposite is true and that, in fact, the introduction of the test may have little impact.

In line with previous authorities, the EAT concluded that the question is not to determine if the disclosure was in the public interest, if the worker making it believed it was in the public interest, and if it was reasonable for them to do so.

These issues are fact sensitive. For example, in the Morgan case, the claimant stated that she believed that her disclosures were in the public interest because Mencap is a publicly financed charity and the public would be interested to know how it treats its employees.

Opinion: public interest test

Whistleblowing: Is the bar for the “public interest” test too low?

The decision demonstrates that more personal issues (ie regarding an individual employee’s contract of employment or working conditions) can still potentially meet the public interest test.

The outcome of this and previous cases has demonstrated that the courts are taking a fairly broad approach to the meaning of public interest, an approach which does not necessarily sit comfortably with the meaning anticipated by employers.

However, it is also clear each case will turn on its facts and that the interpretation of the “public interest” test will be one of degree based on those facts.

The “public interest” test is due to be heard by the Court of Appeal in the Chesterton case later this year. It is hoped that some clarity will be provided at that stage.

In the meantime, employers are reminded that it is the reasonable belief of the employee that matters, not whether or not the matter is actually in the public interest, and that a relatively small group of people may be found to constitute an interested public.

Currently, therefore, the bar for employees to assert that they have blown the whistle is set low.

Avatar
Naomi Clarkson

Naomi Clarkson is a solicitor at DLA Piper.

previous post
Look after the health of mobile workers
next post
Public-sector HR valued by leaders

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

You may also like

Hot summers, hot desks – employment law advice...

12 Aug 2022

Working in a heatwave: what should employers consider?

11 Aug 2022

Nearly 14,000 whistleblowing reports of furlough fraud received...

11 Aug 2022

Former MP’s aide unfairly dismissed after whistleblowing

9 Aug 2022

‘Pushy’ lawyer awarded £152k for sex discrimination

8 Aug 2022

Extension of UK PPE regulations shines a light...

22 Jul 2022

Supreme Court: Holiday pay for part-year staff should...

20 Jul 2022

Employers urged to improve knowledge of heat health...

19 Jul 2022

Union calls for maximum workplace temperature as heatwave...

18 Jul 2022

Skin cancer warning for men as heatwave set...

15 Jul 2022
  • 6 reasons why work-based learning is better than traditional training PROMOTED | A recent Fortune/Deloitte survey found that 71% of CEOs are anticipating that this year’s biggest business disrupter...Read more
  • Strengthening Scotland’s public services through virtual recruiting PROMOTED | This website is Scotland's go-to place for job seekers looking to apply for roles in public services...Read more
  • What’s next for L&D? Enter Alchemist… PROMOTED | It’s time to turn off the tedious and get ready for interactive and immersive learning experiences...Read more
  • Simple mistakes are blighting the onboarding experience PROMOTED | The onboarding of new hires is a company’s best chance...Read more
  • Preventing Burnout: How can HR help key workers get the right help? PROMOTED | Workplace wellbeing may seem a distant memory...Read more

Personnel Today Jobs
 

Search Jobs

PERSONNEL TODAY

About us
Contact us
Browse all HR topics
Email newsletters
Content feeds
Cookies policy
Privacy policy
Terms and conditions

JOBS

Personnel Today Jobs
Post a job
Why advertise with us?

EVENTS & PRODUCTS

The Personnel Today Awards
The RAD Awards
Employee Benefits
Forum for Expatriate Management
OHW+
Whatmedia

ADVERTISING & PR

Advertising opportunities
Features list 2022

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • Linkedin


© 2011 - 2022 DVV Media International Ltd

Personnel Today
  • OHW+
  • Join
  • Resources
    • Clinical governance
    • Disability
    • Ergonomics
    • Health surveillance
    • OH employment law
    • OH service delivery
    • Research
    • Return to work and rehabilitation
    • Sickness absence management
    • Wellbeing and health promotion
  • Conditions
    • Mental health
    • Musculoskeletal disorders
    • Blood pressure
    • Cancer
    • Cardiac
    • Dementia
    • Diabetes
    • Respiratory
    • Stroke
  • CPD
  • Webinars
  • OHW Awards
  • Jobs
  • Personnel Today