Mississippi Whistleblower Attorneys Discuss Attorney General Eric Holder’s Call for Increased Financial Incentives for Whistleblowers

Recently, Attorney General Eric Holder called on Congress to increase the financial incentives presently offered to corporate insiders who blow the whistle on white collar crime.  Holder cited to the troubling return of many of the risky behaviors that led to the 2008 financial crisis as requiring increased incentives to encourage whistleblowers.

Holder’s remarks came the same week that Lehman Brothers’ collapse sent the financial markets into chaos six years ago.  Holder stated that now, the government has the opportunity to leverage the lessons, insights, and experience learned from investigating the last financial crisis to the potential for more issues unfolding around us today.

For years, the Justice Department has been harshly criticized for failing to criminally prosecute the senior officers of banks that pushed risky mortgage securities as part of the overall web of deception that caused the monumental burst in the U.S. housing market.

Holder countered such criticisms by noting that the Justice Department recently obtaining guilty pleas from the French bank BNP and Swiss bank Credit Suisse.  These verdicts were said to end significant speculation that some banks are too big to prosecute.

Holder did stress, however, that reconstructing crimes after the fact is both complex and difficult.  Building a case against often insulated senior officers, who have often shielded themselves skillfully with written disclosures and advice of counsel defenses is never easy.  As such, Holder states, it is important to uncover and police illegal activity as it occurs.  To accomplish this, the Justice Department needs whistleblowers as cooperating witnesses.

Currently, the federal False Claims Act offers whistleblowers who alert authorities to fraud, scams, or crimes against the government a recovery of up to one third of what the investigators recover for taxpayers.  This figure has led to the recovery of more than $22 billion since just 2009.

However, in recent years, the Justice Department has increasingly relied on a 1991 law designed to build mortgage-related cases accusing banks and other financial institutions of internal fraud.  These cases have led to major settlements with large financial institutions, including Citigroup, JP Morgan, and Bank of America.

The problem with this law is that is caps the recovery of whistleblowers at $1.6 million.  This sum, for an individual who is likely risking his or her entire career to cooperate with investigators and uncover fraud, is paltry, according to Holder.  Holder pointed out that in the last year, the collective bonus pool was over $26 billion and the median pay among executives is $15 million and rising.

Employees with lucrative careers in the financial sector are unlikely to be induced to blow the whistle for the sum of $1.6 million.  As such, Holder is urging an increase in incentives under the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act.

Barrett Law PLLC: Mississippi Whistleblower Attorneys Handling Even the Most Complex of Qui Tam Actions

Bringing a whistleblower claim requires courage, dedication, and experienced legal guidance.  Whistleblower actions are often complex and can take time to successfully mount.  The award winning Mississippi Whistleblower Attorneys at Barrett Law PLLC have over 75 years experience guiding brave whistleblowers through the filing of qui tam actions.  We have the skill, knowledge, and passion to bring even the most complex of whistleblower actions and will always fight for your maximum recovery.  At Barrett Law PLLC, we offer a free consultation to all new clients and operate on a contingency fee basis.  For representation by a team of renowned whistleblower attorneys, call Barrett Law PLLC today at 1 (601) 790-1505 to schedule your free consultation.

/by

Mississippi Qui Tam Attorneys Discuss Student Aid Fraud

Whistleblower actions filed under the False Claims Act assist the government in stopping fraud in connection with federal student loans and grant, referred to collectively as “student aid,” received by for-profit schools, such as vocational, trade, or technical colleges.  Student aid whistleblowers are usually current or former employees of the schools who come forward to assist the federal government in uncovering and putting a stop to fraudulent activity through the filing of qui tam lawsuits under the False Claims Act.

Whistleblowers, referred to as “relators,” who file under the False Claims Act can recover an award of between 15% and 30% of the government’s total recovery for claims that expose fraud occurring in connection with the receipt of federal monies, including student aid.

In the last decade, enrollment and tuition prices at for-profit educational institutions have increased dramatically.  Between 2009 and 2010, for-profit schools received $32 billion in federal student aid funding.  This comprises 25 percent of all federal student aid disbursed by the Department of Education through the Higher Education Act.  The majority of student aid comes in the form of Stafford loans, Pell Grants, and GradPlus loans.  Along with this influx of federal monies has come an increase in scrutiny by both federal and Mississippi state officials who question whether the tax dollars being pumped into these schools are justified by the education provided to students.

In 2011, a monumental whistleblower action was filed against one of the largest for-profit colleges.  The suit resulted in the recovery of $78.5 million on behalf of the government, and a substantial award to the brave whistleblower.  Some violations that have recently gained government support include:

  • Enrolling ineligible students;
  • Tying employee compensation to student enrollment figures;
  • Receiving more than 90 percent of the school’s funding from federal student aid;
  • Misrepresenting job placement rates of graduates;
  • Continuing to enroll students who should have been dismissed due to poor grades or attendance.

New federal and state regulations have recently been enacted and the number of claims filed by whistleblowers against for-profit schools and colleges will likely increase in the future.  Some potential claims may include:

  • Inaccurate reporting of attendance, graduation, and student employment data;
  • Deceptive recruitment or marketing practices;
  • Falsifying student information to qualify for student aid;
  • Inaccurate reporting of private loans, discounts, or rebates provided to students.

Anyone considering filling a qui tam action under the False Claims Act will need an experienced attorney to represent them.  Your attorney will guide you through the often complex qui tam procedure and assist you in filing your action.  Your attorney will ensure you do not experience illegal retaliation for your actions, and see that you receive the whistleblower award you deserve for bringing the fraudulent activity to light.

Barrett Law PLLC: Protecting Schools, Colleges, Universities, and the Public Through Student Aid Fraud Actions

Whistleblower actions filed under the False Claims Act can prove instrumental in helping the government stop fraud in connection with federal student loans and grants.  Whistleblowers who file Qui Tam lawsuits under this act can also receive considerable compensation.  The renowned Mississippi Qui Tam Attorneys at Barrett Law PLLC have over 75 years of experience guiding brave whistleblowers through the filing of educational fraud based qui tam actions.  Our experienced attorneys have the drive, knowledge, and exceptional skill to successfully bring any qui tam action.  At Barrett Law PLLC, we offer a free consultation to all new clients and operate on a contingency fee basis.  For representation by a team of celebrated whistleblower attorneys, call Barrett Law PLLC today at 1 (601) 790-1505 to schedule your free consultation.

/by

The False Claim Act’s “First to File” Rule

Any whistleblower who is considering reporting fraud under the False Claims Act should be aware and have a basic understanding of the “first to file” rule.  This rule makes it imperative that whistleblowers file their action before any other potential whistleblower, as doing so is a necessary and critical part of any potential recovery.

The False Claims Act is set out in 31 U.S.C. § 3730(b)(5).  The law provides that no person other than the Government can intervene or bring a related action based on the facts in the underlying pending action.  The “first to file rule” bars later allegations of fraud based on the same basic facts or allegations of fraud as already set out in a previous action.

The Purpose of the First to File Rule

There are several reasons behind the adoption of the first to file rule.  First, the rule is intended to provide motivation to individuals who promptly alert the government to the facts of a fraudulent scheme.  The whistleblower that first reports the fraud to the government will be the only one who can recover a monetary award for providing such information.  By encouraging the whistleblowers to report the fraud as soon as possible, the rule also serves the interests of the government in recovering money paid out as a result of the fraud.

Second, the first to file rule under the False Claims Act discourages the filing of additional lawsuits based on the same facts that have already been or are being litigated in earlier filed petitions because this would not enhance the government’s ability to investigate and uncover fraud.  Once the government is aware of the fraud after the filing of the initial action, allowing additional lawsuits would only drain government resources with no potential for additional recovery.

The First to File Rule Bars Related Actions

In examining the first to file rule, most courts have interpreted the meaning of “related action” based on the underlying facts of the pending action quite broadly.  The facts of the second qui tam do not have to be identical for the suit to be barred under the first to file rule.  Most courts instead look to whether the claim involves the same type of fraud, the same essential elements, or the same material elements of fraud.

Courts will look to two central questions: 1) Does the second qui tam suit allege a different type of wrongdoing based on facts different from those presented in the first suit? 2) Does the second action give rise to a separate and distinct recovery by the government?  Looking at all these factors, the court will determine whether the second action is barred by the first to file rule.

Key Points to Take Away from the First to File Rule

Potential whistleblowers should glean from the first to file rule that it is absolutely essential they bring their claim as early as possible to ensure it will not be barred. Additionally, whistleblowers should also takeaway the importance of retaining an experienced qui tam attorney who will help them bring this complex action.

Barrett Law PLLC: Representing False Claim Act Whistleblowers in Mississippi

The experienced Mississippi Qui Tam Lawyers at Barrett Law PLLC understand the importance of being the first to file in a qui tam action under the False Claims Act.  We have guided countless whistleblowers through the filing of qui tam actions under the False Claims Act.  We understand what it takes to bring a successful action from our over 75 years in the industry.  At Barrett Law PLLC, we offer a free consultation to all new clients and operate on a contingency fee basis.  For representation of unmatched excellence, call Barrett Law PLLC today at 1 (601) 790-1505 to schedule your free consultation.

 

 

/by

Important Facts About Qui Tam Suits Filed Under the False Claims Act

The False Claims Act, also known as the Lincoln Law, imposes liability on individuals or companies who defraud the U.S. government or one of its programs.  This Act also includes a qui tam claims provision that allows individuals, known as relators or more commonly whistleblowers, to file actions on behalf of the government to expose the fraud.  Whistleblowers are entitled to receive a portion of the funds recovered as damages.

Qui tam actions under the False Claims Act are complex and involve several legal intricacies.  The following is a look at some facts that anyone considering whistleblowing should know concerning qui tam actions and the False Claims Act.

The False Claims Act Contains a First to File Rule

Under the False Claims Act, only the first plaintiff to file his or her case will be able to continue the action and recover damages.  The first to file rule is broadly interpreted so that any actions that contain the same essential facts or allegations of fraud as set out in previously filed claims will be barred.

When you file your action, you will not know what similar cases have been filed because qui tam cases are initially kept under seal.  The important thing to take away from this rule is that the early you can reasonably file your claim, the better your chances are of being able to proceed and potentially recover down the road.

False Claims Act Cases Cannot be Based on Information in the Public Domain

The qui tam provision within the False Claims Act is intended to encourage those with insider knowledge of the fraud occurring against the government to come forward.  Therefore, cases cannot be based on information that is in the public domain unless the plaintiff was the original source of that information.

Qui Tam Cases are More Likely To Succeed When the Government Joins the Case

After a qui tam case is filed in court, a copy of the complaint and a disclosure statement with all the facts will be sent to the Department of Justice.  The DOJ will conduct a lengthy investigation and decide whether it wants to intervene or join in on the case.  If the government elects not to join in, the plaintiff can still continue with the action.  The government could intervene at a later date.

While the case can succeed without the government’s action, having the government intervene can increase your chance of success.  The government has tremendous resources, investigatory powers, and an ability to impose sanctions that can obtain the results you desire.

False Claims Cases Are Typically Under Seal for Some Time

Qui tam cases are initially filed in federal court under seal and are not served on the defendant.  The purpose of this is to allow the government some time to investigate the claims without the government’s knowledge.  Typically, the claim will remain under seal for 60 days but complex actions can be sealed for far longer.

Barrett Law PLLC: Mississippi Qui Tam Attorneys of Distinction

Bringing a qui tam action under the False Claims Act is complex and requires the assistance of an experienced whistleblower attorney.  The seasoned Mississippi Qui Tam Lawyers at Barrett Law PLLC have over 75 years experience guiding whistleblowers through the filing of qui tam actions.  We have the knowledge and skill to bring even the most complex of actions and will fight for the success of your action.  At Barrett Law PLLC, we offer a free consultation to all new clients and operate on a contingency fee basis.  For representation of unmatched excellence, call Barrett Law PLLC today at 1 (601) 790-1505 to schedule your free consultation.

/by

CDC Whistleblower’s Claims Ignite Controversy

Recently, a CDC whistleblower released highly controversial information that has sent the autism community and the public into an uproar.  The information has not yet been verified but already the public responsive is explosive.

A well respected researcher working for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), along with Dr. Brian Hooker of the Focus Autism Foundation, allege that the CDC has manipulated vaccine research data in an attempt to cover up the MMR and autism link.

The data that has allegedly been covered up or manipulated demonstrates a higher incidence of autism in African-American boys who received their MMR vaccine according to the CDC schedule.  The study in question was published in the journal Pediatrics. The study examined children with and without autism by examining the age at which they first received the MMR shot.  It used a population based study in Atlanta.

Dr. Hooker states that he acquired documents relating to the supposed cover up via a Congressional request from the chairman of the House Oversight and Government Record Committee.  Hooker, citing the two sources, has accused the CDC of widespread manipulation of scientific data concerning the safety of the MMR vaccine.

According to the whistleblower team, the study showed that there was actually a 3.36 fold increase risk for autism in African-American boys who received the MMR vaccination before the age of 36 months.  This flies in the face of the studies presented findings that no risk exists in obtaining the vaccine on time, and the CDC’s general public message that the MMR vaccine is not linked in any way to autism.

The whistleblower and Dr. Hooker claim the CDC knew of the risks that accompanied the shot as early as 2003, prior even to the study’s publication.  The whistleblower initially remained anonymous but has since identified himself as Dr. William Thompson who does work at the CDC and is considered a well respected professional.

Thus far, the CDC has not responded to allegations, nor has a statement been issued by the American Academy of Pediatrics.  Families of children with autism have taken to social media sites demanding answers and the infliction of punishment, while others have sharply refuted the claims of the whistleblower.

While the ultimate result of this whistleblower’s claims remain to be seen, we can glean from this case the difficulties inherent in being a whistleblower.  The doctor that has brought this information to light no doubt risks his career and standing in the medical community.  His claims have already gathered much media attention and will continue to do so.

Though being a whistleblower is undoubtedly difficult, it is of the utmost importance to the American public as a whole.  Without some of the brave whistleblowers of the past, much fraud would never have been uncovered and dismantled.  Whistleblowers are vital, and with the assistance of an experienced whistleblower attorney, they too can be protected in bringing their action.

Barrett Law PLLC: Mississippi Attorneys Assisting Brave Whistleblowers

The experienced Mississippi Qui Tam Lawyers at Barrett Law PLLC understand that being a whistleblower is never easy.  It involves speaking out and often facing much criticism, along with the potential for retaliation.  The whistleblower attorneys at Barrett Law PLLC respect the decision of whistleblowers to put their livelihoods on the line and will do all we can to see that your case is successful and you experience none of the potential negative repercussions that can accompany whistleblowing.  At Barrett Law PLLC, we offer a free consultation to all new clients and operate on a contingency fee basis.  For representation of unmatched excellence, call Barrett Law PLLC today at 1 (601) 790-1505 to schedule your free consultation.

/by

Mississippi Whistleblower Attorneys Discuss Notable Qui Tam Lawsuits

Whistleblowers have become a well-known concept to the general public thanks, in large part, to several famous Hollywood films.  A whistleblower is anyone who reveals misconduct on the part of a company or their employer.  The misconduct often involves fraud or corruption perpetuated for financial gain.  The U.S. government is a frequent victim of intentional fraud, costing taxpayers astronomical sums each year.

While the term whistleblower is well known, the lawsuits brought by whistleblowers, called Qui Tam actions, are less understood.  The origin of qui tam actions stems from The False Claims Act.  Created in 1863 by Abraham Lincoln, the False Claims Act is intended to punish persons or companies who defraud the U.S. government.  Within the law is a so-called “qui tam” condition that allows a private person to file suit on the government’s behalf.  The concept of qui tam itself dates back to 13th century England.

The False Claims Act offers whistleblowers a financial incentive intended to encourage them to step forward.  The whistleblower who successfully files the suit can receive between 15 and 30 percent of the money recovered by the federal government.  In 1986, the False Claims Act was strengthened to provide additional whistleblower rights out of concern for rampant fraud in the military contracting industry.  Since this time, the number of whistleblower actions filed each year has risen dramatically.

            The following is a look at a few high-profile whistleblower cases:

  1. Pfizer, Inc: In this famous 2009 case, a sales representative for Pfizer, John Kopchinski, filed a qui tam suit against his employer for engaging in fraudulent marketing practices with Bextra.  The suit alleged that Pfizer violated the federal laws banning kickbacks by reimbursing Bextra through both state and federal government programs, including Medicaid and Medicare.  Pharmaceutical giant Pfizer plead guilty and paid fines in excess of $2.3 billion.  This was the largest criminal fine ever imposed in the U.S.  Pfizer also paid $1.195 billion in the qui tam action, making it the largest civil settlement against a pharmaceutical company.  Kopchinski and six others split $102 million.
  2. Northrop Grumman: Northrop Grumman is a large aerospace and defense technology company.  Whistleblower Robert Ferro filed a qui tam suit against this company, charging it with selling faulty electronic equipment for use with military satellites.  The $325 million settlement that resulted is the biggest settlement paid by a defense contractor in this sort of suit.  Ferro received over $48 million for his actions in whistleblowing.
  3. Quest Diagnostics: In this sizable case, Quest Diagnostics, a giant medical lab company, paid a $302 million settlement, representing the largest amount paid by a medical lab company for a faulty product.  The qui tam case was filed by a California biochemist.  He asserted that Quest’s subsidiary, Nichols Institute Diagnostics Inc., was selling faulty blood kits to medical testing companies and hid the evidence that the kits were inaccurate.  This whistleblower was awarded 18 percent of the massive $253 million settlement.

Barrett Law PLLC: Experienced Representation for Qui Tam Whistleblower Actions

Qui tam lawsuits allow the courts to correct and put a stop to fraudulent activity, while also providing whistleblowers with financial compensation for their brave efforts in coming forward.  Across three generations and for over 75 years, the Mississippi Whistleblower Attorneys at Barrett Law PLLC have guided whistleblowers through the filing and pursuit of qui tam actions.  We have the skill, experience, and dedication to zealously pursue your qui tam case.  Barrett Law PLLC offers a free consultation to all new clients and operates on a contingency fee basis.  For excellence of legal services unmatched across the state of Mississippi, call Barrett Law PLLC today at 1 (601) 790-1505 to schedule your free consultation.

/by

The Whistleblowers Who Tried to Lift the Veil Before Snowden

Though Edward Snowden is the individual best known for leaking government documents that expose possible unconstitutional activity, a host of whistleblowers before him also struggled to lift the veil on questionable government activities.  Bill Benney is one such individual.  Binney worked at the National Security Agency (NSA) for nearly three decades as a leading crypto-mathematician.  He later became one of its leading whistleblowers.

Binney, who is now 70 and on crutches after losing a leg to diabetes, can still vividly recall the July morning seven years ago when over a dozen armed FBI agents burst through his front door as he was coming out of the shower.

The NSA is an agency overseen by Congress, the courts, and other governmental departments, along with its own workers.  In the past dozen years, whistleblowers like Binney have not had an easy time exposing misconduct.  Those early whistleblowers that attempted to work within the system state that Edward Snowden learned from their harsh experience.

Binney’s decision to go from NSA employee to whistleblower came shortly after September 11, 2011, when he uncovered the NSA had begun using a software he created to gather information about unwitting Americans without a court order.  In his belief, this act amounted to treason as it subverted the U.S. Constitution.

Binney and two other NSA employees who also later resigned from the agency first attempted to raise the issue with congressional committees.  However, because they lacked the documents to prove their charges, no one believed them.  Snowden did not repeat that mistake.  He seemed to recognize right away, perhaps after watching Binney and the others fail, that you need to provide documentation.  This is why Snowden had such an impact, where others that tried to work within the system failed to.

For instance, computer expert Thomas Drake blew the whistle on what he considered to be unconstitutional NSA programs.  Instead of resulting in investigations into the NSA—Drake found himself under prosecution.  Drake, who had taken his concerns to both the NSA and Congress, eventually showed unclassified information from the NSA to a reporter when no action was taken internally.  His home was raided and he was charged with violating the Espionage Act.  Drake ended up negotiating a misdemeanor plea after the government’s case fell apart and now works at an Apple store.  Drake too believes Snowden learned from his plight.

George Ellard, the NSA’s inspector general, has told the public that Snowden could have properly raised his concerns and Ellard would have offered him protection.  Snowden claims he did try to blow the whistle internally at the NSA, but Ellard never heard from him.

Since Snowden, Binney, and Drake’s attempts at whistleblowing, the rules for whistleblowers have changed.  President Obama issued a directive intended to provide greater protections for whistleblowers working for intelligence agencies, since they are not afforded the same protections as other federal employees.  Employees who raise concerns while employed, like Drake, will have a chance to appeal to inspectors generals at other intelligence agencies. Former employees, like Binney, are not afforded the same protections.

Bill Binney offers some important advice for anyone considering whistleblowing—the first thing you must do is get a lawyer.

Barrett Law PLLC: Providing Experience and Dedicated Representation to Brave Mississippi Whistleblowers

The Mississippi Whistleblower Attorneys at Barrett Law PLLC believe whistleblowers like Bill Benney and so many others within both federal and state agencies serve a vital function to the American public.  These courageous whistleblowers risk their jobs and livelihood to expose illegal activities that affect us all.  For over 75 years, our Mississippi qui tam attorneys have assisted whistleblowers in exposing fraudulent conduct.  We also protect whistleblowers who have experienced any sort of retaliation for their actions.  Call Barrett Law PLLC today at 1 (601) 790-1505 to schedule your free consultation.

/by

Retaliation & Whistleblowing in Mississippi: FAQs

An employee who acts as a whistleblower and reports the unlawful conduct of an employer or co-worker may experience some form of retaliation.  Those caught in this situation may be confused, unclear as to their rights, and feeling trapped.  Under Federal and Mississippi law, employees who report unlawful conduct are protected from retaliation by their employer or co-worker.  You do have recourse if you have experienced negative repercussions at work due to your whistleblowing report.

The following is a list of questions frequently asked by whistleblowers in Mississippi concerning retaliation and their rights against it:

What protection do I have against retaliation by an employer?

Employees are protected from retaliation by employers for asserting protected rights. In a retaliation claim, the employer generally takes some negative action against the employee due to their assertion of their protected right.  The retaliation can come in the form of:

  • Suspension
  • Demotion
  • Harassment or intimidation
  • Termination of employment
  • Other threatening behavior

To win a retaliation suit, an employee must prove they engaged in a protected conduct; their employer took adverse action against them; and the employer took such adverse action because they engaged in protected conduct.

What conduct is protected?

In order to be protected, the conduct must be such that a federal or state law prohibits retaliation for engaging in it or the court finds retaliation against the conduct jeopardizes public policy.  Some examples of protected conduct would include complaints about the conditions or terms of employment, as this is covered under the National Labor Relations Act.

If I report conduct that I believe is unlawful but it turns out to be lawful, am I still protected against retaliation?

So long as the report was made in good faith, yes.  You will receive the same protection from retaliation as you would have if the conduct turned out to be illegal.  It should also be noted that protection extends to former employees.  Therefore, if you file a complaint but later leave the job and your employer provides unfavorable references due to your previous complaint, this is actionable retaliation.

How close in time must the retaliation be?

Time is often the most important evidence between whistleblowing and reprisal.  Since you must establish the employer took the negative action due to your whistleblowing, an adverse event that takes place shortly after the protected conduct will be easier to prove.  However, this does not mean actions that take place months later will be dismissed.  Sometimes, an earlier, minor action against the employee can provide evidence to link the later, more dramatic reprisal.  A skilled whistleblower attorney will assist you in analyzing the timing and strength of your potential case.

What are the remedies for retaliation?

The exact remedies available if you are successful in your suit will vary depending upon your jurisdiction and the law which your employer violated.  However, some possible remedies include:

  • Reinstatement
  • Back pay
  • Liquidated damages (double your back pay)
  • Front pay (future wages)
  • Punitive damages
  • Attorney’s fees

Your attorney will discuss the precise remedies available to you after review of your case.

Barrett Law PLLC: Protecting Mississippi’s Brave Whistleblowers   

For over 75 years, across three generations, the Mississippi Whistleblower Attorneys at Barrett Law, PLLC have provided skilled, zealous, and intelligent representation for courageous Mississippi whistleblowers.  We believe that whistleblowers serve a vital function in our society, exposing waste of government resources and fraudulent conduct.  As such, we will strive zealously to assist you in exposing such harmful conduct.  Barrett Law, PLLC operates on a contingency fee basis and the first consultation is always free.  The attorneys at Barrett Law, PLLC pride themselves on ensuring each and every client receives superior representation, with passion and zeal.  Call today at 1 (601) 790-1505 to schedule your free consultation.

/by

VA Chief Vows to Crackdown on Whistleblower Retaliation

Speaking at a national convention of the Veterans of Foreign Wars in St. Louis, Missouri, the acting secretary of the embroiled Department of Veterans Affairs vowed to end whistleblower retaliation.  This promise comes shortly after a private government watchdog agency released a report documenting and criticizing the VA’s negative treatment of employees who brought internal problems to light.

During the July 22, speech, Sloan Gibson pledged that the VA would do more to listen to workers who report problems.  Gibson, a former bank executive, took over the VA in late May after Eric Shinseki resigned amid controversy concerning treatment delays and falsified records occurring at VA hospitals nationwide.  The alarming reports included allegations that dozens of patients died awaiting treatment.

The Jackson, Mississippi VA hospital, called the G.V. (Sonny) Montgomery Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Center, was at the heart of much controversy.  Several whistleblowers reported poor patient care at this hospital, including reports by Dr. Phyllis Hollenbeck, Dr. Charles Sherwood, and five other employees.  These doctors and staff reported that at the Jackson VA patients received inadequate review of radiology findings, were provided with unlawful prescriptions for narcotics, treated with unsterile medical equipment, and provided with chemotherapy drugs that were created using non-compliant pharmacy equipment.  In addition to these alarming problems, the whistleblowers revealed persistent problems with under-staffing, excessive wait times, and care that occurred so slowly patients elected to leave the hospital.  There are still over 50 lodged whistleblower complaints at the Jackson VA facility awaiting review and action.

On Monday, July 21, the Project for Government Oversight revealed that it had received complaints from almost 800 current and former VA workers as to possible wrongdoing.  Gibson stated in his speech before the Veterans of Foreign Wars that as a former private sector leader, he learned the most important source for information and improvement is employees.  If the VA is to deliver a better outcome for patients, Gibson said, it cannot create an environment where employees are afraid to speak out against misconduct.  The current environment in which employees’ opinions and concerns are not welcomed or tolerated must change, according to Gibson.

While Gibson’s speech was well received and employees along with the public hope his promises ring true, most remain skeptical.  Gail Wilson, a Vietnam veteran from Oxford, Mississippi says that he will not be convinced until he sees tangible changes.  His last appointment at the Memphis VA office was canceled at the last minute, without notice.

Any whistleblower who believes they have experienced an act of retaliation should consult with a licensed attorney in their area as soon as possible.  As whistleblowers, you have the right to be protected from any sort of retaliation and can take action to correct your employer’s wrongdoing.

Barrett Law PLLC: Mississippi Whistleblower Attorneys Protecting Employee Rights

The Jackson, Mississippi VA hospital has received much criticism and several alarming reports as of late.  The brave whistleblowers who stepped forward to expose poor patient care, long wait times, understaffing, and dangerous misdiagnoses are legally entitled to protection from any sort of retaliation.  Despite federal and state protections, some of these whistleblowers have experienced retaliation in the form of firings, being passed by for promotions, ill treatment, and more.  The Mississippi Whistleblower Attorneys at Barrett Law PLLC vow to protect courageous VA hospital whistleblowers who strive to make the hospital a better place for patients.  For over 75 years, we have assisted VA employees and hundreds of other employees in bringing to light fraudulent activities while protecting against any sort of mistreatment. For help with your potential whistleblower action, call Barrett Law PLLC today at 1 (601) 790-1505 to schedule your free consultation.

/by

Letter from the U.S. Office of Special Counsel Reveals VA Downplayed Whistleblower Findings

Over the past few years, a number of whistleblowers have come forward with disturbing complaints concerning the G.V. (Sonny) Montgomery Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Center.  This VA hospital is located in Jackson, Mississippi, and treats thousands of veterans per year.  The whistleblower allegations raised serious questions about the hospital’s management system and ability to care for veterans.

A report from an independent federal agency criticized the Department of Veterans Affairs for not adequately responding to the information provided by whistleblowers which raises systematic concerns about patient care.  The report from the U.S. Office of Special Counsel reprimanded the VA for downplaying the severity of its problems at several facilities, including Jackson.

In a letter sent Monday, June 23, 2014, to the President from Special Counsel Carolyn Lerner stated that she remained concerned about the VA’s willingness to acknowledge and address the problems raised by whistleblowers.  She cited specifically to those brought to light in Jackson.  Here, numerous disclosures concerning patient care were made by Dr. Charles Sherwood, Dr. Phyllis Hollenbeck, and five other whistleblowers.  The VA substantiated alarming information, such as inadequate review of radiology findings, improper credentialing of providers, unlawful prescriptions for narcotics, unsterile medical equipment, and non-compliant pharmacy equipment used to create chemotherapy drugs.  In addition to these frightening problems, the whistleblowers revealed a persistent patient care problem of understaffing and excessive wait times, resulting in patients leaving the facility without ever having received care.

Complaints against the Jackson VA are certainly not new.  Several whistleblowers stepped out in 2009 to reveal concerns about improper sanitation and a lack of cleaning.  The VA vowed to take action after these allegations surfaced, but the number of whistleblowers have only increased since then.

According to Special Counsel Lerner, despite confirming each of these problems, the VA raised the defense of “harmless error”—asserting that these issues had no impact on patient care.  According to Lerner, this approach is preventing the VA from taking any real action to ensure veterans’ safety and health.

OSC recently closed investigations into the Jackson VA facility.  It still has over 50 pending cases of whistleblower disclosures from various VA employees.  In addition, Lerner’s, letter to the President came just two weeks after OSC stated it was investigating dozens of accusations of retaliation against VA whistleblowers.

Jackson VA officials have responded to Lerner’s letter by stating that they have embraced recommendations that came from OSC last summer and taken action to deal with identified problems. Officials state that the closing of the OSC report does not end its commitment to ensuring veterans obtain quality health care.

If you have information concerning unethical, illegal, or harmful practices occurring in your workplace, consult with a whistleblower attorney today to protect your rights.  Whistleblowers are protected against retaliatory action for raising complaints concerning the disruptive practices they see.  Further, qui tam lawsuits can result in the whistleblower receiving monetary compensation for their actions in coming forward to stop injustice.

Barrett Law PLLC: Protecting Mississippi’s Brave Whistleblowers

For over 75 years, across three generations, the Mississippi Whistleblower Attorneys at Barrett Law, PLLC have provided skilled, zealous, and intelligent representation for courageous Mississippi whistleblowers.  We believe that whistleblowers serve a vital function in our society, exposing waste of government resources and fraudulent conduct.  As such, we will strive zealously to assist you in exposing such harmful conduct.  Barrett Law, PLLC operates on a contingency fee basis and the first consultation is always free.  The attorneys at Barrett Law, PLLC pride themselves on ensuring each and every client receives superior representation, with passion and zeal.  Call today at 1 (601) 790-1505 to schedule your free consultation.

/by