California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Okamoto v. City of Pasadena, B297559 (Cal. App. 2020):
information, to a government or law enforcement agency, to a person with authority over the employee, or another employee who has the authority to investigate, discover, or correct the violation or noncompliance . . . if the employee has reasonable cause to believe that the information discloses a violation of state or federal statute, or a violation of or noncompliance with a local, state, or federal rule or regulation." ( 1102.5, subd. (b).) In order to make a prima facie case for whistleblower liability under section 1102.5, subdivision (b), the employee must show that: (1) he made the type of disclosure described in the statute, and thus engaged in protected whistleblowing activity; (2) he was thereafter subject to an adverse employment action; and (3) there was a causal link between the protected activity and the adverse employment action.2 (Hager v. County of Los Angeles (2014) 228 Cal.App.4th 1538, 1540 (Hager).)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.