Speak Up Procedures - Institute of Business Ethics

1
SPEAK UP PROCEDURES
PART 1
• A clear statement that malpractice is taken seriously in the organisation
and an indication of the sorts of matters regarded as malpractice
• Respect for the confidentiality of staff raising concerns if they wish, and
the opportunity to raise concerns outside the line management structure
• Penalties for making false and malicious allegations
• An indication of the proper way in which concerns may be raised outside
the organisation if necessary.
“[This approach…] goes further by inviting all staff to act responsibly to
uphold the reputation of their organisation and maintain public confidence. It
might help to avoid the cases when the first reaction of management faced
with unwelcome information has been to shoot the messenger.”
Whistleblowing Best Practice - Second Report, Committee on Standards in
Public Life, May 1996 13
Speak Up legislation in other countries
UK organisations operating overseas may be governed by legislation in other
countries. Some examples are below.
Sarbanes-Oxley Act 2002 (US)
In the wake of the Enron and Worldcom collapses, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002 was enacted in the US. It contains significant protections for corporate
whistleblowers. As part of the mandated audit committee function, publicly
traded corporations must establish procedures for employees to file internal
complaints and procedures which would protect the confidentiality of employees
who file allegations with the audit committee.
CNIL (France)
In May 2005, the French Data Protection Authority (Commission Nationale de
l'Informatique et des Libertés, or CNIL) refused to authorise two whistleblowing
programmes submitted by the multinational burger chain McDonald’s and by
CEAC, a division of Exide Technologies. The companies had prepared these
programmes in order to comply with the requirements of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002. The grounds for refusal were twofold: that employees might be deprived
of certain rights to which they are entitled under French law, and that such
programmes are tantamount to systems of “professional incrimination” or
“professional denunciation” that could be slanderous.
These decisions have prevented multinationals from simultaneously complying
with Sarbanes-Oxley requirements and French data protection laws.
13 http://www.pcaw.co.uk/about/nolan.html
8