Where a man was fired less than two weeks after he raised concerns about a company’s compliance with federal regulations, he plausibly alleged a claim for whistleblower retaliation.
Background
Matthew Foosaner alleges one count of retaliation against Crown Castle USA Inc. pursuant to the Defense Contractor Whistleblower Protection Act, or DCWPA. In sum, plaintiff asserts that he was terminated in retaliation for making disclosures protected under the DCWPA to management officials or other employees who had a duty to investigate, discover or address such alleged misconduct. Defendant has filed a motion to dismiss.
Protected disclosure
Defendant argues that any disclosure plaintiff made before being hired is not protected because plaintiff was not an employee. Defendant also argues that any disclosure plaintiff made after being hired is not protected because it was not new or different from the disclosures made during the interview process.
To begin with, defendant’s argument is devoid of any citation to case or statutory authority that supports its position that an employee loses statutory protection by making disclosures, which would otherwise be protected, during the interview process. Nor would such a rule make sense as it would discourage individuals from raising concerns at the first available opportunity.
In any event, as the amended complaint makes clear, plaintiff did not make disclosures during the interview process. Rather, plaintiff’s amended complaint alleges...
WASHINGTON, April 23 (Reuters) – President Donald Trump’s years-long campaign to undermine faith in U.S. elections has gained broad traction with the American public, a Reuters/Ipsos poll shows, p...