Case law has established that subjecting an employee to detriment post-employment for a whistleblowing disclosure made during employment is unlawful. In Onyango v Berkeley the EAT has now confirmed that there is protection even if the disclosure itself is made after the employment has ended.
In contrast, the EAT in Rowstock v Jessemey has ruled that, due to a drafting error, the Equality Act does not prohibit post-employment victimisation. This commonly consists of an employer giving an unfairly negative reference or refusing to give a reference (when it is normal practice to do so) because the employee has made or been involved in a discrimination claim. Leave to appeal was given; if the appeal fails, the Government will need to amend the Act as this position contravenes EU law.
Key contacts
Samantha Brown
Managing Partner, Employment, Pensions and Incentives, UK and EMEA, London
Steve Bell
Managing Partner, Employment, Industrial Relations and Safety, Asia and Australia, Melbourne
Emma Rohsler
Partner, Head of Employment, Pensions and Incentives, EMEA, Paris
Tim Leaver
Partner, London
Andrew Taggart
Partner, London
Fatim Jumabhoy
Partner, Head of Employment & Workplace Investigations, Asia, Singapore
Barbara Roth
Partner, New York
Christine Young
Partner, London
Disclaimer
The articles published on this website, current at the dates of publication set out above, are for reference purposes only. They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such. Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought separately before taking any action.