Lori Hanson, a regional director with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, reported suspected child neglect and prostitution at the hotel where she was staying for a work-related conference, and was fired. She brought a retaliation lawsuit, which was thrown out by the Minnesota Supreme Court. How could this be? Aren’t whistleblowers protected under the law?
The internal investigation into Ms. Hanson’s conduct revealed that she had complained to hotel staff several times about a baby crying in a neighboring room. At one point, she opened her room door and—completely naked—looked up and down the hallway. (She denied that she was undressed, claiming that the hotel’s security video footage had been tampered with.) Ms. Hanson later complained about a potential “sex ring” when—now in her pajamas—she opened her door and saw two men knocking on the door of the room where the baby had been crying.
Ms. Hanson called 911 and identified herself as a state official needing an escort because she had discovered a prostitution ring, She also called county and state officials. Hotel security and law enforcement came, and found nothing amiss in the neighboring room, which contained a family with a teething baby.
Ms. Hanson caused such a disturbance that hotel management asked her to leave, and she was escorted out by state, county, and local law enforcement officers, some of whom smelled alcohol on her breath. Ms. Hanson refused a Breathalyzer test. One of the officers later called the Department of Natural Resources and reported her behavior.
In affirming the dismissal of Ms. Hanson’s case, the Minnesota Supreme Court noted that Ms. Hanson had provided no evidence that her reporting of suspected child neglect and prostitution motivated her termination. Rather, her employer had provided more than ample evidence of its legitimate, non-retaliatory reasons: “[I]t was inappropriate for Hanson to appear in a public space without clothes on, assert her position as a state official to gain preferential treatment, use DNR resources in a personal situation…and create such a disturbance that she is asked to leave a hotel in a region where she was supposed to be cultivating good working relationships.”
Hanson v. Department of Natural Resources, 2022 Minn. LEXIS 130 (Minn. Sup. Ct. April 6, 2022)
What this means to you:
Whistleblower laws do not shield workers from the consequences of their own misconduct. A negative employment action is not retaliatory merely because it occurs after the employee engages in protected activity. Whistleblowing employees continue to be subject to all job requirements and disciplinary rules.
In our Managing Within the Law program, conveniently available in both classroom and webinar versions, managers learn to carefully assess disciplinary and discharge decisions for employees to ensure they have legitimate, nonretaliatory reasons for any adverse action.
Call us today at 800-458-2778 or by emailing us to find out more about our national HR training programs or to book a workshop.
Updated 05-09-2022
Information here is correct at the time it is posted. Case decisions cited here may be reversed. Please do not rely on this information without consulting an attorney first.
