Whistleblower Act changes provide more protection, scope

March 18, 2009

By Communications staff, Washington State University

Three substantial changes were made in 2008 to the state’s Whistleblower Act that make it easier for state employees to discuss and report improper governmental actions. In brief, it created a network of local “public officials,” it expanded protection beyond whistleblowers to the people participating in a whistleblower investigation, and it expanded the scope of what types of actions are improper or illegal.

Written Report Requirements

A written assertion report should include:

A detailed description of the improper governmental action or actions
The name of each employee who is involved in the alleged improper governmental action
The identity of the agency, division and location where the action or actions occurred
Details that may be important for the investigation, e.g., witnesses, documents, and evidence
If known, the specific law or regulation that has been violated
The name, home address, and contact telephone number of the person submitting the report (optional)

Complaints must be filed within one year of the action in question.

Employees may submit whistleblower reports anonymously.

The State Auditor’s Office sends acknowledgment to the whistleblower within 15 working days of receipt of the report. The acknowledgement states whether or not a preliminary investigation will be conducted.

The revised law, Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill 6776 (Chapter 42.40 RCW), requires designated state government “public officials” to receive and document whistleblower complaints and forward them to the State Auditor’s Office if appropriate criteria is met.

WSU now has at least one local designated public official on each campus who can receive reports. At WSU Vancouver, Spokane and Tri-Cities the chancellor is the public official; at WSU Pullman it is the director of the Office of Internal Audit.

However, if people prefer, they can still submit their report directly to the State Auditor’s Office, or to the state’s Executive Ethics Board or an Attorney General’s designee.

Adding designated public officials at local agencies makes it easier for employees to file or discuss possible complaints, and it increases the possibility that complaints will be filed, said Heather Lopez, director of WSU’s Office of Internal Audit.

The previous definition of improper governmental actions include any action by an employee undertaken in the performance of the employee’s official duties which:

Is a gross waste of public funds or resources.
Is in violation of federal or state law or rule, if the violation is not merely technical or of a minimum nature.
Is of substantial and specific danger to the public health or safety.

The new law expanded this definition of improper governmental action to include actions undertaken in the performance of official duties which:

Represent a gross mismanagement.
Prevents dissemination of scientific opinion or alters technical findings.

The new regulations also expand protection to anyone who “provides information” in a whistleblower investigation, as well as to anyone who is “perceived” to have provided information to a whistleblower investigation.

“These are really big changes to the Whistleblower law; they are designed to protect people who file a report or who give testimony in the investigation,” said Lopez.

If you feel you have been retaliated against, you should notify the state Human Right Commission (http://www.hum.wa.gov) at phone 800-233-3247.

“Although complaints may be filed anonymously, complaints must be submitted in good faith meaning they are not frivolous or malicious,” Lopez said.

She also noted that the State Auditor’s Office “does not take personnel related complaints, there are other avenues and agencies available for handling those types of issues,” including the Center for Human Rights, the Employee Assistance Program, the Office of the University Ombudsman, and the state Human Right Commission.

For information on the state Whistleblower program: