In the first post of this series, I wrote about the Federal False Claims Act ("FCA") and that it creates a cause of action for employees called a "qui tam" action. I compared the FCA to the basic principles underlying Ohio's whistleblower statute. In my second post, I discussed the anti-retaliation provisions under both laws. In this article, I discuss Ohio's public policy exception to at will employment and how this relates to whistleblowing.
Yesterday, the Ohio House joined the Senate in unanimously passing a bill to set up a fraud tracking system for fraud reported to the Ohio Auditor and extend whistleblowing protections to those who report the fraud. State Representative Ross McGregor, the bill's sponsor, has been pushing for a whistleblower protection law like this for several years.
In Part One of this series, I discussed the qui tam provisions under the federal False Claims Act (FCA) and compared it to Ohio's whistleblower statute. This post addresses the retaliation provisions.
The Federal False Claims Act ("FCA") creates a whistleblowing cause of action for an employee who feels retaliated against for "blowing the whistle" on the employer's illegal activities. Additionally, Ohio has a whistleblower statute and provides protections to at will employees under the public policy laws. But what do these protections really mean? Many employees misunderstand the protections of the FCA and Ohio's laws. This post will address the protections afforded to employees under the FCA's qui tam provisions and compare it to Ohio's whistleblower statute. My next post will address retaliation for making such reports. Finally, I will discuss Ohio's public policy exception to at will employment.