Retaliation for whistleblowing: some case studies on the experience of re-employment/redeployment

Purpose Courts and tribunals seem to have little knowledge about what factors make re-employment practicable. This paper aims demonstrate that the re-employment/redeployment of whistleblowers may well be “successful” in a wide range circumstances. Design/methodology/approach Interviewees were identified via direct call organisations involved advising or representing whistleblowers. Covid restrictions at time (March–April 2021) prevented case study interviews being conducted person, so Zoom carried out. Findings The “success” re-employment/ redeployment was associated with following factors: individual returned same job different boss location; concern raised dealt with; there had been judicial involvement by way mediation and/or adjudication; lawyers used as representatives; most returnees not financially worse off; support family, friends colleagues willing get press other media involved. Research limitations/implications As findings are based on 11 arising from snowball sampling, it goes without saying they cannot considered representative, more extensive research is needed check their validity. It should also noted positive views expressed reflect fact those who negative experiences returning work less likely volunteer interviewed. author believes this demonstrates phenomenological approach can provide important insights into highly complex nature both retaliation for whistleblowing any ensures. Practical implications That could identified, which might redeployment, has legal human resource practitioners perhaps wider society suffer wrong say remedy afforded. Originality/value To author’s knowledge, almost no out reemployed/redeployed raising concerns.