Leora Eisenstadt and Jennifer Pacella, in their paper for the American Business Law Journal, examine why courts protect some whistleblowers more than others, specifically, those who report financial fraud versus those who report workplace discrimination. They find that fraud whistleblowers are often praised as protecting the public, while discrimination whistleblowers face skepticism and tougher legal standards that make retaliation harder to prove. Their research also shows that these differences stem more from judicial attitudes than from the laws themselves. The authors argue that these unequal protections can discourage workers from reporting discrimination. Their research calls on courts or Congress to create consistent standards that protect whistleblowers regardless of the type of misconduct they expose.
The Whistleblower Perception Problem in Judicial Imagination and Treatment
