Trade Unions and Whistleblowing: Can They Do More Than Protect Their Members?

The role of trade unions in relation to whistleblowing is frequently seen as reactive and defensive. They often have limited resources and regard their prime function as  being to advise potential whistleblowers and to represent both those who feel they have been victimised for reporting concerns and members who are alleged to have engaged in wrongdoing.  Research conducted by Public Concern at Work and the University of Greenwich in the UK suggests  that trade unions are good at performing these tasks but are not particularly effective in ensuring that allegations are investigated and wrongdoing rectified.

A more proactive and collective role for trade unions would be to negotiate whistleblowing policies and procedures at the workplace where employers were willing to do so. Research conducted in several countries consistently shows that whistleblowers normally report their concerns internally first and that line managers are often the first port of call. However, if this manager is not appropriate for any reason (for example, is the subject of an allegation or is regarded by the whistleblower as unsympathetic/antagonistic), the question arises as to whether, for trade union members, a lay or full –time official should be regarded as a suitable alternative to approaching higher management.

This paper will examine the existing data about how trade unions function in relation to the whistleblowing process and will consider the ways in which they could use their collective strength to play a more positive role in dealing with alleged workplace wrongdoing.