House File 500 - Introduced HOUSE FILE BY SWAIM Passed House, Date Passed Senate, Date Vote: Ayes Nays Vote: Ayes Nays Approved A BILL FOR 1 An Act relating to disclosures of wrongdoing by government 2 employees. 3 BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF IOWA: 4 TLSB 1882HH 81 5 ec/gg/14 PAG LIN 1 1 Section 1. Section 8A.417, subsection 4, Code 2005, is 1 2 amended to read as follows: 1 3 4. a. A person shall not discharge an employee from or 1 4 take or fail to take action regarding an employee's 1 5 appointment or proposed appointment to, promotion or proposed 1 6 promotion to, or any advantage in, a position in a merit 1 7 system administered by, or subject to approval of, the 1 8 director as a reprisal for a failure by that employee to 1 9 inform the person that the employee made a disclosure of 1 10 information permitted by this section, or for a disclosure of 1 11 any information by that employee to a member or employee of 1 12 the general assembly, or for a disclosure of information to 1 13 any other public official or law enforcement agency if the 1 14 employee reasonably believes the information evidencesaany 1 15 violation of law or rule, mismanagement, a gross abuse of 1 16 funds, an abuse of authority, or a substantial and specific 1 17 danger to public health or safety. However, an employee may 1 18 be required to inform the person that the employee made a 1 19 disclosure of information permitted by this section if the 1 20 employee represented that the disclosure was the official 1 21 position of the employee's immediate supervisor or employer. 1 22 This subsection does not apply if the disclosure of the 1 23 information is prohibited by statute. 1 24 b. For purposes of this subsection, any presumption 1 25 relating to the performance of a duty by a person who has 1 26 authority to take, direct others to take, recommend, or 1 27 approve any personnel action may be rebutted by substantial 1 28 evidence. For purposes of this subsection, a determination as 1 29 to whether an employee reasonably believes that the employee 1 30 has disclosed information that evidences any violation of law 1 31 or rule, mismanagement, a gross abuse of funds, an abuse of 1 32 authority, or a substantial and specific danger to public 1 33 health or safety shall be made by determining whether a 1 34 disinterested observer with knowledge of the essential facts 1 35 known to and readily ascertainable by the employee would 2 1 reasonably conclude that the actions disclosed evidence of 2 2 such violation, mismanagement, abuse, or danger. 2 3 Sec. 2. Section 70A.28, subsections 1 and 2, Code 2005, 2 4 are amended to read as follows: 2 5 1. A person who serves as the head of a state department 2 6 or agency or otherwise serves in a supervisory capacity within 2 7 the executive or legislative branch of state government shall 2 8 not require an employee of the state to inform the person that 2 9 the employee made a disclosure of information permitted by 2 10 this section and shall not prohibit an employee of the state 2 11 from disclosing any information to a member or employee of the 2 12 general assembly or from disclosing information to any other 2 13 public official or law enforcement agency if the employee 2 14 reasonably believes the information evidencesaany violation 2 15 of law or rule, mismanagement, a gross abuse of funds, an 2 16 abuse of authority, or a substantial and specific danger to 2 17 public health or safety. However, an employee may be required 2 18 to inform the person that the employee made a disclosure of 2 19 information permitted by this section if the employee 2 20 represented that the disclosure was the official position of 2 21 the employee's immediate supervisor or employer. 2 22 2. A person shall not discharge an employee from or take 2 23 or fail to take action regarding an employee's appointment or 2 24 proposed appointment to, promotion or proposed promotion to, 2 25 or any advantage in, a position in a state employment system 2 26 administered by, or subject to approval of, a state agency as 2 27 a reprisal for a failure by that employee to inform the person 2 28 that the employee made a disclosure of information permitted 2 29 by this section, or for a disclosure of any information by 2 30 that employee to a member or employee of the general assembly, 2 31 or a disclosure of information to any other public official or 2 32 law enforcement agency if the employee reasonably believes the 2 33 information evidencesaany violation of law or rule, 2 34 mismanagement, a gross abuse of funds, an abuse of authority, 2 35 or a substantial and specific danger to public health or 3 1 safety. However, an employee may be required to inform the 3 2 person that the employee made a disclosure of information 3 3 permitted by this section if the employee represented that the 3 4 disclosure was the official position of the employee's 3 5 immediate supervisor or employer. 3 6 Sec. 3. Section 70A.28, Code 2005, is amended by adding 3 7 the following new subsection: 3 8 NEW SUBSECTION. 2A. For purposes of subsections 1 and 2, 3 9 any presumption relating to the performance of a duty by a 3 10 person who has authority to take, direct others to take, 3 11 recommend, or approve any personnel action may be rebutted by 3 12 substantial evidence. For purposes of subsections 1 and 2, a 3 13 determination as to whether an employee reasonably believes 3 14 that the employee has disclosed information that evidences any 3 15 violation of law or rule, mismanagement, a gross abuse of 3 16 funds, an abuse of authority, or a substantial and specific 3 17 danger to public health or safety shall be made by determining 3 18 whether a disinterested observer with knowledge of the 3 19 essential facts known to and readily ascertainable by the 3 20 employee would reasonably conclude that the actions disclosed 3 21 evidence of such violation, mismanagement, abuse, or danger. 3 22 Sec. 4. Section 70A.29, subsection 1, Code 2005, is 3 23 amended to read as follows: 3 24 1. a. A person shall not discharge an employee from or 3 25 take or fail to take action regarding an employee's 3 26 appointment or proposed appointment to, promotion or proposed 3 27 promotion to, or any advantage in, a position in employment by 3 28 a political subdivision of this state as a reprisal for a 3 29 disclosure of any information by that employee to a member or 3 30 employee of the general assembly, or an official of that 3 31 political subdivision or a state official or for a disclosure 3 32 of information to any other public official or law enforcement 3 33 agency if the employee reasonably believes the information 3 34 evidencesaany violation of law or rule, mismanagement, a 3 35 gross abuse of funds, an abuse of authority, or a substantial 4 1 and specific danger to public health or safety. This section 4 2 does not apply if the disclosure of the information is 4 3 prohibited by statute. 4 4 b. For purposes of this subsection, any presumption 4 5 relating to the performance of a duty by a person who has 4 6 authority to take, direct others to take, recommend, or 4 7 approve any personnel action may be rebutted by substantial 4 8 evidence. For purposes of this subsection, a determination as 4 9 to whether an employee reasonably believes that the employee 4 10 has disclosed information that evidences any violation of law 4 11 or rule, mismanagement, a gross abuse of funds, an abuse of 4 12 authority, or a substantial and specific danger to public 4 13 health or safety shall be made by determining whether a 4 14 disinterested observer with knowledge of the essential facts 4 15 known to and readily ascertainable by the employee would 4 16 reasonably conclude that the actions disclosed evidence of 4 17 such violation, mismanagement, abuse, or danger. 4 18 EXPLANATION 4 19 This bill deals with establishing permissible disclosures 4 20 of government information relating to Iowa's whistleblower 4 21 statutes. Iowa law provides that disclosures of information 4 22 by a government employee are protected from adverse employment 4 23 action if the employee reasonably believes that the 4 24 information evidences a violation of law or rule, 4 25 mismanagement, a gross abuse of funds, an abuse of authority, 4 26 or a danger to public health or safety. 4 27 The bill provides that any presumption applicable to the 4 28 performance of duty by a supervisory person relating to an 4 29 employee's disclosure of information may be rebutted by 4 30 substantial evidence. In addition, the bill provides that a 4 31 determination as to whether an employee reasonably believes 4 32 that they have disclosed information that evidences wrongdoing 4 33 shall be made by determining whether a disinterested observer 4 34 with knowledge of the essential facts known to and readily 4 35 ascertainable by the employee would reasonably conclude that 5 1 the actions disclosed evidence of such violation, 5 2 mismanagement, abuse, or danger. 5 3 LSB 1882HH 81 5 4 ec:nh/gg/14