Skip to main content
Log in

Trade Unions and the Whistleblowing Process in the UK: An Opportunity for Strategic Expansion?

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Historically, whistleblowing research has predominantly focused on psychological and organisational conditions of raising concerns about alleged wrongdoing. Today, however, policy makers increasingly start to look at institutional frameworks for protecting whistleblowers and responding to their concerns. This article focuses on the latter by exploring the roles that trade unions might adopt in order to improve responsiveness in the whistleblowing process. Research has consistently demonstrated that the two main reasons that deter people from reporting perceived wrongdoing are fear of retaliation and a belief that the wrongdoing is unlikely to be rectified. In this article, we argue that trade unions have an important part to play in dealing with both these inhibiting factors but this requires them to be appropriately engaged in the whistleblowing process and willing to take a more proactive approach to negotiations. We use Vandekerckhove’s 3-tiered whistleblowing model and Kaine’s model of union voice level to structure our speculative analysis of the various ways in which trade unions can interact with whistleblowers and organisations they raise concerns about alleged wrongdoing in, as well as agents at a regulatory level. Our articulation of specific roles trade unions can play in the whistleblowing process uses examples from the UK as to how these trade union roles are currently linked to and embedded in employment law and whistleblowing regulation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Addison, J. T., & Belfield, C. R. (2003). Union voice. No: IZA Discussion Paper Series. 862.

  • Beck, U. (1992). Risk society: Towards a new modernity. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brinsfield, C. T. (2014). Employee voice and silence in organizational behaviour. In A. Wilkinson, J. Donaghey, T. Dundon, & R. B. Freeman (Eds.), Handbook of research on employee voice (pp. 114–131). Edward Elgar: Northampton, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, A. J. (Ed.). (2008). Whistleblowing in the Australian public sector: Enhancing the theory and practice of internal witness management in public sector organisations. Canberra: ANU E Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, A. J., Lewis, D., Moberly, R., & Vandekerckhove, W. (Eds.). (2014). International handbook on whistleblowing research. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • BSI. (2008). PAS 1998:2008 whistleblowing arrangements. Code of practice. London: British Standards Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Budd, J. W. (2014). The future of employee voice. In A. Wilkinson, J. Donaghey, T. Dundon, & R. B. Freeman (Eds.), Handbook of research on employee voice (pp. 477–487). Edward Elgar: Northampton, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carr, I., & Lewis, D. (2010). Combating corruption through employment law and whistleblower protection. Industrial Law Journal, 39(1), 1–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CoE. (2014). Recommendation CM/Rec(2014) 7 of the Committee of Ministers to member States on the protection of whistleblowers, Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 30 April 2014, at the 1198th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Detert, J. R., & Burris, E. R. (2007). Leadership behaviour and employee voice: Is the door really open? Academy of Management Journal, 50, 869–884.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Detert, J. R., & Edmondson, A. C. (2011). Implicit voice theories: taken-for-granted rules of self-censorship at work. Academy of Management Journal, 54, 461–488.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. B., & Medoff, J. (1984). What do unions do?. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frege, C., & Kelly, J. (2003). Union revitalisation strategies in comparative perspective. European Journal of Industrial Relations, 9(1), 7–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirschman, A. (1970). Exit, voice and loyalty: Responses to decline in firms, organizations, and States. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hyman, R. (1991). Trade Unions and the disaggregation of the working class. Management Research News, 14(10), 5–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hyman, R. (2007). How can trade unions act strategically? Transfer, 13(2), 193–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jubb, P. B. (1999). Whistleblowing: A restrictive definition and interpretation. Journal of Business Ethics, 41(3), 217–234.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaine, S. (2014). Union voice. In A. Wilkinson, J. Donaghey, T. Dundon, & R. B. Freeman (Eds.), Handbook of research on employee voice (pp. 170–187). Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katz, G., & Lenglet, M. (2010). Whistleblowing in French corporations: Anatomy of a national taboo. Philosophy of Management, 9(1), 103–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, D. (2006). The contents of whistleblowing/confidential reporting procedures in the UK. Some lessons from empirical research. Employee Relations, 28(1), 76–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, D. (2008). Ten years of public interest disclosure legislation in the UK: Are whistleblowers adequately protected? Journal of Business Ethics, 82, 497–507.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, D. (2013). Resolving whistleblowing disputes in the public interest: is tribunal adjudication the best that can be offered? Industrial Law Journal, 42(1), 35–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, D. (2015). Is a public interest test for workplace whistleblowing in society’s interest? International Journal of Law and Management, 57(2), 141–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, D., D’Angelo, A., & Clark, L. (2015). Surveys of NHS staff, trusts and stakeholders. London: Middlesex University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mesmer-Magnus, J. R., & Viswesvaran, C. (2005). Whistleblowing in organizations: An examination of correlates of whistleblowing intentions, actions, and retaliation. Journal of Business Ethics, 62(3), 277–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miceli, M. P., Near, J. P., & Dworkin, T. M. (2008). Whistle-blowing in organizations. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, E. W. (2011). Employee voice behaviour: Integration and directions for future research. Academy of Management Annals, 5, 373–412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Near, J. P., & Miceli, M. P. (1985). Organizational dissidence: The case of whistle-blowing. Journal of Business Ethics, 4(1), 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Near, J. P., & Miceli, M. P. (1995). Effective-whistle blowing. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 679–708.

    Google Scholar 

  • Near, J. P., & Miceli, M. P. (1996). Whistle-blowing: Myth and reality. Journal of Management, 22(3), 507–526.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Organ, D. (1988). A restatement of the satisfaction–performance hypothesis. Journal of Management, 14(4), 547–557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • PCaW. (2013a). Whistleblowing code of practice. London: Public Concern at Work.

    Google Scholar 

  • PCaW. (2013b). Whistleblowing: The inside story. London: Public Concern at Work.

    Google Scholar 

  • PCaW. (2013c). Whistleblowing commission report. London: Public Concern at Work.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, A., & Lewis, D. (2013). Whistleblowing to regulators: Are prescribed persons fit for purpose. London: Middlesex University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pohler, D. M., & Luchak, A. A. (2014). The missing employee in employee voice research. In A. Wilkinson, J. Donaghey, T. Dundon, & R. B. Freeman (Eds.), Handbook of research on employee voice (pp. 188–207). Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skivenes, M., & Trygstad, S. C. (2010). When whistle-blowing works: The Norwegian case. Human Relations, 63(7), 1071–1097.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skivenes, M., & Trygstad, S. C. (2014). Wrongdoing- definition and contextual factors. In A. J. Brown, D. Lewis, R. Moberly, & W. Vandekerckhove (Eds.), International handbook on whistleblowing research (pp. 95–114). Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skivenes, M., & Trygstad, S. C. (2015). Explaining whistle blowing processes in the Norwegian labour market: Between individual power resources and institutional arrangements. Economic and Industrial Democracy. doi:10.1177/0143831X14559783.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsahuridu, E. E., & Vandekerckhove, W. (2008). Whistleblowing and moral autonomy in organisations. Journal of Business Ethics, 82(1), 107–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Es, R., & Smit, G. (2013). Whistleblowing and media logic: A case study. Business Ethics: A European Review, 12(2), 144–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vandekerckhove, W. (2006). Whistleblowing and organizational social responsibility. A global assessment. Aldershot: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vandekerckhove, W. (2010). European whistleblower protection: tiers or tears? In D. Lewis (Ed.), A global approach to public interest disclosure (pp. 15–35). Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vandekerckhove, W., Brown, A. J., & Tsahuridu, E. E. (2014). Managerial responsiveness to whistleblowing: Expanding the research horizon. In A. J. Brown, D. Lewis, R. Moberly, & W. Vandekerckhove (Eds.), The international whistleblowing research handbook (pp. 298–329). Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vandekerckhove, W., & James, C. (2013). Blowing the whistle to the union: How successful is it? E-Journal of International and Comparative Labour Studies, 2(3), 66–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vandekerckhove, W., & Lewis, D. (2012). The content of whistleblowing procedures: A critical review of recent official guidelines. Journal of Business Ethics, 108(2), 253–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vandekerckhove, W., & Rumyantseva, N. (2014). Freedom to speak up qualitative research. London: University of Greenwich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vandekerckhove, W., & Tsahuridu, E. E. (2010). Risky rescues and whistleblowing. Journal of Business Ethics, 97(3), 365–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wim Vandekerckhove.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lewis, D., Vandekerckhove, W. Trade Unions and the Whistleblowing Process in the UK: An Opportunity for Strategic Expansion?. J Bus Ethics 148, 835–845 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3015-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3015-z

Keywords

Navigation