The Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989 (WPA) is a federal law that protects most federal-government employees from retaliation when they report waste, fraud, abuse, illegality, or a danger to public health or safety. It does not cover private-sector workers, state or local government employees, or most military personnel. If you work for a federal agency and you spoke up and got punished for it, this is the law that most likely applies to you.
One important note up front: there is no "Whistleblower Protection Act of 2017." People search for that, but the law was enacted in 1989 and most significantly strengthened by the Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act of 2012 (WPEA). (A separate 2017 law, the Dr. Chris Kirkpatrick Whistleblower Protection Act, added some accountability measures, but the core protections come from the 1989 statute as amended in 2012.) This article explains all three in plain English.
Who the WPA actually protects
The WPA applies to employees and applicants in most of the executive branch of the federal government. That includes the vast majority of civil-service workers at agencies like the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Social Security Administration, the EPA, and dozens of others.
It generally does not cover:
- Private-sector employees. If you work for a company, your whistleblower protections come from other laws entirely (more on that below).
- State and local government workers. Those protections come from state laws, which vary by state.
- Most intelligence-community employees (CIA, NSA, FBI, and similar), who have a separate, parallel system under Presidential Policy Directive 19 and related statutes.
- The U.S. Postal Service and a handful of other entities, which have their own rules.
If you are unsure whether you are covered, the U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC) is the agency that can help you figure that out.
What counts as a protected disclosure
The heart of the WPA is the idea of a protected disclosure. You are protected when you disclose information that you reasonably believe shows one of the following:
- A violation of any law, rule, or regulation;
- Gross mismanagement;
- A gross waste of funds;
- An abuse of authority; or
- A substantial and specific danger to public health or safety.
The key phrase is "reasonably believe." You do not have to be right. You only need to have a good-faith, reasonable basis for your belief at the time you spoke up. A disinterested observer with the same facts would have to be able to reach the same conclusion. You also do not need to use any magic words or cite a specific statute when you report.
You can make a protected disclosure to almost anyone in a position to do something about it: your supervisor, your agency's Inspector General, the OSC, Congress, or even (in many cases) the press. The 2012 update made clear that a disclosure does not lose protection just because it was made to a supervisor or to the very person who committed the wrongdoing, was made during your normal job duties, revealed information that was previously disclosed, or was based on a policy disagreement, as long as the underlying disclosure meets the standard above.
What retaliation looks like
The WPA prohibits agencies from taking or threatening a personnel action because of your protected disclosure. Personnel actions are defined broadly and include:
- Firing, demotion, suspension, or a poor performance review;
- Denial of a promotion, training, or a within-grade pay increase;
- Reassignment or a significant change in duties, responsibilities, or working conditions;
- A negative reference, a security-clearance action, or a referral for a fitness-for-duty exam;
- Any other significant change in your terms of employment.
Even ordering someone to undergo a psychiatric or medical evaluation in retaliation can count, a problem the 2017 Kirkpatrick law specifically targeted after a real case involving exactly that abuse.
What the 2012 Enhancement Act changed
For years, federal courts and the Merit Systems Protection Board had read the 1989 law narrowly, and many whistleblowers lost. The Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act of 2012 was Congress's response. In plain terms, it:
- Closed the loopholes that had let agencies argue a disclosure was unprotected because of who heard it or when it was made;
- Clarified the "any" standard, so that disclosing a violation of any law, rule, or regulation is covered, not just "serious" ones;
- Protected employees who refuse to obey an order that would require them to violate the law;
- Strengthened remedies, including compensatory damages, and created a path for whistleblowers to ask a federal appeals court (not just the Federal Circuit) to review certain decisions;
- Created an Ombudsman in agency Inspector General offices to educate employees about their rights;
- Restored protections for disclosures related to scientific integrity and the censorship of research.
The 2012 law is why the WPA has real teeth today. When you read about "WPA protections" now, you are almost always reading about the 1989 statute as amended in 2012.
How a federal employee files a WPA claim
The process is different from a typical discrimination complaint, so the steps matter: