The Introhive Case, Not Whistleblowing
Please see the Tribunal verdict in this case below.
It is important to note that in spite of WBUK championing this case, it is not whistleblowing. Prior to the case going to full Tribunal, the judge raised concerns that one of the applicants threatened his employer that he would go to the regulator and tell the companys customers if the company did not give him a substantial settlement. The judge allowed the case to go to full tribunal so the disclosures could be judged.The disclosures consisted of this; if staff emailed personal contacts in company time, the company could read the emails. As we said these are not public interest disclosures by any stretch of the imagination. Given the earlier threats which amount to blackmail and the fact there were no disclosures or detriments involved, it is completly outragous such a case was championed by WBUK and that the applicant has subsequently been platformed as a whistleblower by WBUK as well has given a seniour position with WBUK. Read the below verdict for full details.
We ask that you note thousends of genuine whistleblowers every year risk their jobs by going to their employer with concerns and when the employer fails to act they do not hestitate to take their concerns to the relevent authouritys, often losing their job as a result, these whistleblowers are unable to access the law as they do not have the means to pay and being low paid workers lawyers and WBUK do not take cases where for example, a cleaner or care worker is asking for three months wages which would not amount to much and a percentage of that is a pittance. This is at the heart of everything that is wrong with those who see whistleblowers in terms of potential financial outcomes for those such as WBUK.