Be Prepared for the Whistle to Blow: New York Expands its Whistleblowing Law

Fox Rothschild LLP
Contact

Fox Rothschild LLP

New York employers should brace for the significant expansion of the whistleblower protections set forth in New York Labor Law § 740 (Section 740) under legislation (S.4394A/A.5144A) signed into law in October by New York Gov. Kathy Hochul.

These sweeping changes should prompt businesses to review and/or revise their whistleblower policies as well as train supervisors on what to do when an employee makes a complaint that improper activity has occurred or is taking place before the law takes effect on January 26, 2022.

Until now, New York’s whistleblower employment protections in Section 740 were limited to actual violations of a law, rule or regulation that resulted in a specific, substantial danger to the public health or safety or constituted health care fraud. Effective January 26, Section 740 is expanded greatly both in scope and application. The new law will now be substantially similar to the broad protections afforded employees across the river under New Jersey’s Conscientious Employee Protection Act (CEPA), which is generally considered one of the nation’s most expansive whistleblower protection laws.

Once these amendments to Section 740 are effective, New York whistleblower protection will encompass not only employees who report violations of a law, rule or regulation, but employees who report, object to, refuse to participate in, disclose or participate in an investigation into an employer’s activity, policy or practice that the individual reasonably believes is a violation of a law, rule or regulation. Specifically, the amendments expand Section 740 to state that an employer cannot retaliate against an employee for any of the following whistleblowing activities:

  1. Disclosing or threatening to disclose to a supervisor or to a public body an activity, policy or practice of the employer that the employee reasonably believes is in violation of a law, rule or regulation or that the employee reasonably believes poses a substantial and specific danger to public health or safety (an “improper activity”)
  2. Providing information to, testifying before or participating in an investigation of a public body regarding any improper activity by the employer
  3. Objecting to or refusing to participate in any improper activity

Where an employee’s claim is predicated on disclosure to a public body, Section 740 requires that the employee first make a good faith effort to notify the employer. However, there are five enumerated exceptions to this notice requirement:

  1. There is an imminent and serious danger to the public health or safety
  2. The employee reasonably believes that reporting the improper activity to the supervisor would result in a destruction of evidence or other concealment of the activity
  3. The improper activity could reasonably be expected to lead to endangering the welfare of a minor
  4. The employee reasonably believes that reporting to the supervisor would result in physical harm to the employee or another
  5. The employee reasonably believes that the supervisor is already aware of the improper activity and will not correct it

In addition to expanding the scope of what constitutes whistleblowing activity, the legislation expands Section 740 to include the following:

  • An expanded definition of “employee” to include not only employees but also former employees and natural persons employed as independent contractors;
  • A broader definition of “law, rule or regulation” to include not only federal, state or local statutes or ordinances and the rules or regulations promulgated therefrom, but also executive orders and their resultant regulations and “any judicial or administrative decision, ruling or order”;
  • A far reaching definition of “retaliatory action” to encompass: (1) adverse employment actions or threats of adverse employment actions (like demotion, suspension or termination of employment); (2) actions or threats to negatively impact a former employee’s current or future employment; or (3) threatening to report the immigration or suspected citizenship of an employee or employee’s family to authorities;
  • A lengthened statute of limitations from one to two years;
  • Additional available relief in the form of a civil penalty and punitive damages;
  • The right to a jury trial; and
  • Additional posting requirement, obligating every employer to post a notice of the rights and obligations under Section 740 in a conspicuous location.

The available relief under the amended Section 740 remains largely the same as before, whereby a successful whistleblower may be granted:

  • an injunction to stop an employer’s continued violation
  • reinstatement as an employee or front pay in lieu of reinstatement
  • reinstatement of fringe benefits and seniority
  • compensation for lost wages and benefits
  • payment of costs, disbursements, and attorney’s fees

However, the revisions to Section 740 add the potential for a civil penalty of up to $10,000 and punitive damages for a willful, malicious or wanton violation. Nevertheless, if an employee brings a claim without basis in law or fact (i.e., the claim is frivolous), the court may grant the employer its reasonable attorneys’ fees, costs and disbursements.

Because of the amendments to Section 740, New York employers should prepare to see an uptick in whistleblower actions with new and unique claims asserted by employees. In New Jersey, CEPA cases comprise a significant number of case filings each year; New Yorkers should expect the same. It is likely that some of the case law that has developed in New Jersey on issues that have arisen under the statute, such as what constitutes a “reasonable belief” and whether alleged whistleblowing conduct implicates a law, rule or regulation or mere disagreement with an internal operating procedure, may prove instructive.

[View source.]

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Fox Rothschild LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Fox Rothschild LLP
Contact
more
less

PUBLISH YOUR CONTENT ON JD SUPRA NOW

  • Increased visibility
  • Actionable analytics
  • Ongoing guidance

Fox Rothschild LLP on:

Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
- hide
- hide