Question 1

Explain what happened in the 1968 Supreme Court's re-interpretation of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution regarding public employees' limited speech protections.

Accepted Answer

In 1968, the case of Pickering v. Board of Education addressed a public school teacher's criticism of the local school board. The Court weighed "the interests of the teacher, as a citizen, in commenting upon matters of public concern" against the State (a.k.a. the school board). The Pickering case gave public employees limited speech protection.

Question 2

Describe at least two other times since the Pickering decision in which the Supreme Court revisited the ruling. What were the outcomes?

Accepted Answer

In 1983, in Connick v. Myers, Ms. Myers had distributed a questionnaire at her place of employment. The circular not only addressed internal matters, but also matters of legitimate public concern, including pressure put on employees to work on political campaigns. The Connick court determined that the questionnaire had just enough public interest to be examined under the Pickering test, although a statement limited to internal matters would not be. Myers lost the case since the court demonstrated that her questionnaire interfered with working relationships in the workplace.
In 2006, Richard Ceballos, a deputy district attorney, supervised other lawyers in the DA's office. A defense attorney contacted Ceballos to tell him he would be challenging a search warrant because the warrant was based on "inaccuracies" in the supporting affidavit. Ceballos agreed to investigate. When he arrived at the scene in question, a "long driveway" was a separate road. Ceballos told his supervisors the case should be dismissed because of the obvious misrepresentations in the affidavit. Ceballos was reprimanded for this behavior, which lead to retaliations, reassignments, transfers, and denied promotion. He sued, claiming those actions violated his First Amendment rights. The Supreme Court Justices were divided in their opinions.

Question 3

Exceptions to the rule of employment-at-will include which of the following?
I. organization of unions
II. passage of Sarbanes Oxley Act
III. raising of public policy issues
IV. promise of implied-contract or covenant-of-good-faith

Accepted Answer

All of the options listed are exceptions to the rule of employment-at-will. Union organization and raising public policy issues are protected under labor laws. The Sarbanes Oxley Act protects whistleblowers reporting on financial practices. Implied-contract or covenant-of-good-faith promises made by an employer can create grounds for legal action if not upheld.

Question 4

Ag Gag would criminalize:

Accepted Answer

Ag Gag laws aim to criminalize both undercover video recordings showing animal cruelty and recordings of public health violations occurring in agricultural facilities, such as farms or slaughterhouses. These laws are often pushed forward by the agricultural industry to prevent the exposure of any unethical or illegal practices within their facilities.

Question 5

The National Labor Relations Board has stated that the right to discuss working conditions freely and without fear of retaliation should exist at the work site. However, the Board believes the same right does not exist online.

Accepted Answer

The National Labor Relations Board recognizes and protects employees' rights to discuss working conditions on social media and other online platforms, without fear of retaliation from their employer. This was established in the Board's decision in the case of "The Boeing Company", which held that employers cannot prohibit employees from engaging in protected concerted activity on social media or other online platforms.

Question 6

The Food Safety Modernization Act:
I. offers some protections for whistleblowers
II. covers vegetables, seafood and dairy
III. covers eggs and poultry
IV. gives the FDA power to make mandatory recalls

Accepted Answer

The Food Safety Modernization Act offers protections for whistleblowers, covers vegetables, seafood, dairy, and gives the FDA power to make mandatory recalls. It does not cover eggs and poultry, which are regulated by the USDA.

Question 7

Under the legal doctrine of "employment at will" an employee can be lawfully terminated from her job for:
I. wearing a shirt that clashes with her suit
II. any non-discriminatory reason
III. complaining about illegal activity in the workplace
IV. only for good cause

Accepted Answer

The answer of Under the legal doctrine of "employment at...

Question 8

According to the Montana Wrongful Discharge from Employment Act, what are the three elements of a wrongful discharge?

Accepted Answer

The answer of According to the Montana Wrongful Discharge from...

Question 9

As discussed in the text, False Claims Act or qui tam suits have been successful in the health care industry. The text mentions several things that all these successful claims have in common. Discuss those things.

Accepted Answer

The answer of As discussed in the text, False Claims...

Question 10

When Qui Tam whistleblowers against the pharmaceutical industry were questioned about their motivation, several reasons were mentioned. Which of the following was NOT given as a reason?

Accepted Answer

The answer of When Qui Tam whistleblowers against the pharmaceutical...

Question 11

Select the best definition of whistleblower:

Accepted Answer

A whistleblower is a person who reports unethical or illegal activities under the control of their employers. Option A is incorrect because modern ethics training has multiple goals, not just to promote whistleblowing. Option B is the origin of the term "qui tam," which is a specific type of whistleblowing in the United States. Option C is incorrect because whistleblowing is not a narrow exception, but a protected act under the law in many countries.

Question 12

The Constitution does not always protect free-speech rights for what public employees say on the job. Which of the following is true?

Accepted Answer

This is the correct option because public employees do have First Amendment protection when they speak out on matters of public concern, but not when they speak out in the course of their official duties. The Supreme Court has held that restricting speech in this context is necessary to promote the efficiency and effectiveness of public services. Option A is incorrect because when individuals take public employment, they enter into a contractual relationship that comes with certain limitations, including restrictions on their freedom of speech. Option C is incorrect because protecting the speech of public employees on matters of public concern does not necessarily chill the speech of other potential whistleblowers.

Question 13

According to research, what are the characteristics of the typical whistleblower?

Accepted Answer

The answer of According to research, what are the characteristics...

Question 14

To determine whether a public employee receives First Amendment protection from speech (and therefore cannot be fired for it), the Supreme Court has stated that all of the following are important except:

Accepted Answer

The Supreme Court has stated that the content of the speech is not as important as the context in which it was made. While the speech cannot be made as part of the employee's official duties, it can be about political topics and does not have to be about something of great public concern. However, the employer must have a justification for treating the employee differently and the speech must be made as a private citizen, not as part of the employee's official duties.

Question 15

How was Ken Kendrick of The Peanut Corporation of America a typical whistleblower? An atypical whistleblower?

Accepted Answer

The answer of How was Ken Kendrick of The Peanut...

Quiz 2: The Duty of Loyalty: Whistleblowing