The Supreme Court has ruled that UK whistleblowing laws must be read as providing protection against detriment to whistleblowers who do not satisfy the express requirement to be a 'worker', in this case judicial office-holders, in order to comply with the European Convention of Human Rights.
Article 14 of that Convention makes it unlawful to interfere with other Convention rights, such as the Article 11 right to freedom of expression, on prescribed grounds including status. Critically, the Court found that an occupational classification as worker or employee was clearly capable of being a "status".
The decision opens the gate for other non-'workers', such as non-executive directors, volunteers, or job applicants to bring whistleblowing detriment claims. It also highlights the potential to challenge the requirement for worker or employee status in respect of other claims within the scope of Convention rights such as trade union and collective consultation rights. (Gilham v Ministry of Justice)
Disclaimer
The articles published on this website, current at the dates of publication set out above, are for reference purposes only. They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such. Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought separately before taking any action.