Search form

Florida Whistleblower Act Requires Showing of Actual Violation, Federal Court Rules

By Stephanie L. Adler-Paindiris and Matthew A. Klein
  • February 15, 2017

Florida’s private-sector Whistleblower Act (“FWA”) protects only those employees who can show an actual violation of a law, rule, or regulation, a federal district court has held. Graddy v. Wal-Mart Stores East, LP, No. 5:16-cv-9-Oc-28PRL (M.D. Fla. Feb. 14, 2017).

The FWA (Florida Statute Section 448.102) prohibits private-sector employers from retaliating against employees who report employers’ legal violations to authorities or who refuse to participate in violations of the law. To prove a prima facie case under the FWA, the plaintiff must establish that:

  1. he or she engaged in statutorily protected expression;
  2. he or she suffered an adverse employment action; and
  3. the adverse employment action was causally linked to the protected activity.

Confusion as to what employees need to show to claim protection under the FWA has persisted since 2015, when a Florida appellate court, unlike another court, held that the employee must show an actual violation of the law. Kearns v. Farmer Acquisition Co. d/b/a Charlotte Honda, 157 So.3d 458 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015). Another Florida appellate court had held two years earlier that an employee need only show that he or she had a good-faith belief a violation occurred when claiming protection under the law. Aery v. Wallace Lincoln-Mercury, LLC, 118 So. 3d 904, 916 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013).

Since Aery, Florida’s federal district courts have adopted the good-faith belief standard, concluding that Kearns did not directly conflict with Aery, and that Aery was the law of the state.

Under the good-faith belief standard, if an employee refuses to engage in an activity at work because he or she mistakenly believed the activity is illegal, the employee likely will enjoy whistleblower protections from any adverse employment action arising out of not performing his or her job. Critics argue that this frustrates Florida’s status as an at-will employment state.

The Graddy court’s “actual violation” holding may make it easier for an employer to defend against an employee’s FWA claim. The federal court decision interpreting Florida law could mark a new, employer-friendlier chapter in the search for the appropriate interpretation of the FWA. In this case, the court granted summary judgment to the employer after finding the employee did not make out a prima facie case.

We will continue to monitor developments under this law. Employers should consider reviewing their policies and practices to ensure they appropriately address employee whistleblower claims.

If you have any questions about the FWA or require assistance with other workplace issues, please contact the Jackson Lewis attorney with whom you usually work.

©2017 Jackson Lewis P.C. This Update is provided for informational purposes only. It is not intended as legal advice nor does it create an attorney/client relationship between Jackson Lewis and any readers or recipients. Readers should consult counsel of their own choosing to discuss how these matters relate to their individual circumstances. Reproduction in whole or in part is prohibited without the express written consent of Jackson Lewis.

This Update may be considered attorney advertising in some states. Furthermore, prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Jackson Lewis P.C. represents management exclusively in workplace law and related litigation. Our attorneys are available to assist employers in their compliance efforts and to represent employers in matters before state and federal courts and administrative agencies. For more information, please contact the attorney(s) listed or the Jackson Lewis attorney with whom you regularly work.

See AllRelated Articles You May Like

November 28, 2017

Washington Law Bars Retaliatory Discrimination against Job Applicants, State Supreme Court Holds

November 28, 2017

Employers who refuse to hire job applicants who opposed discrimination in a prior job may be sued for retaliation under the Washington Law Against Discrimination (WLAD), the Washington Supreme Court has held in a unanimous decision. Zhu v. North Central Educ. Servs. – ESD 171, No. 94209-9 (Nov. 9, 2017). The Court ruled that WLAD creates... Read More

November 10, 2017

The Speak Out Evolution from Ms. Magazine to #MeToo: The Time Is Now for Employers to Re-Examine Their Practices

November 10, 2017

In a November 5, 2017 article, The New York Times harkened back to the 1977 Ms. magazine cover depicting sexual harassment on its cover. The point was to illustrate the fact that the 1977 Ms. cover is just as relevant today as it was then. In 1986, more than 20 years after the enactment of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the U.S. ... Read More

October 30, 2017

Chicago Adopts ‘Hands Off Pants On’ Law to Protect Hotel Workers from Sexual Harassment, Assault

October 30, 2017

To provide hospitality workers greater protections against sexual harassment and assault, the Chicago City Council passed the “Hands Off Pants On” Ordinance on October 11, 2017. The Ordinance requires all hotels in the City to adopt a panic button system and an anti-sexual harassment policy. The Ordinance was passed after months of... Read More

Related Practices