FDA’s Treatment of Whistleblowers in the Spotlight
The Food and Drug Administration appears to have punished a group of scientists for doing what they thought was right: telling Congress and the White House their safety concerns about devices used to detect breast cancer, colon cancer, and other diseases.
The employees went outside the agency when they felt ignored by their agency leadership. They put their livelihood on the line to try to protect the public from what they saw as unsafe or ineffective products.
The agency responded by apparently engaging in a long campaign of spying on their email accounts, then using the material to demote or fire the employees.
Federal law explicitly protects the right of federal employees to provide information to Congress. I reminded the FDA of the relevant law in January 2009 after this came to my attention. Still, even after that letter, the FDA appears to have persisted in its effort to build a case against the employees. I’m pursuing this matter with the FDA to get answers and ensure that whistleblowers aren’t singled out and retaliated against for protected disclosures to Congress.
My letter to FDA Commissioner Margaret A. Hamburg asks for a description of whether each of the staff members involved still works at the agency and if not, for an explanation of the circumstances of the employee’s departure. It also seeks details of who authorized the monitoring of the employees’ e-mail and to what extent such monitoring occurred.
Ironically, any retaliation against the employees would directly contradict the commissioner’s promise during her 2009 confirmation hearing that she would protect whistleblowers by “creating a culture that enables all voices to be heard.”
The FDA has a huge responsibility to protect public health and safety. With all the important work that needs to be done on that front, it’s hard to see how managers apparently thought it was a good use of time to shadow agency scientists and monitor their email accounts for legally protected communications with Congress. If the agency is stifling alternative points of view, that’s the opposite of “a culture that enables all voices to be heard.”
Monday, Feb. 6, 2012
The Food and Drug Administration appears to have punished a group of scientists for doing what they thought was right: telling Congress and the White House their safety concerns about devices used to detect breast cancer, colon cancer, and other diseases.
The employees went outside the agency when they felt ignored by their agency leadership. They put their livelihood on the line to try to protect the public from what they saw as unsafe or ineffective products.
The agency responded by apparently engaging in a long campaign of spying on their email accounts, then using the material to demote or fire the employees.
Federal law explicitly protects the right of federal employees to provide information to Congress. I reminded the FDA of the relevant law in January 2009 after this came to my attention. Still, even after that letter, the FDA appears to have persisted in its effort to build a case against the employees. I’m pursuing this matter with the FDA to get answers and ensure that whistleblowers aren’t singled out and retaliated against for protected disclosures to Congress.
My letter to FDA Commissioner Margaret A. Hamburg asks for a description of whether each of the staff members involved still works at the agency and if not, for an explanation of the circumstances of the employee’s departure. It also seeks details of who authorized the monitoring of the employees’ e-mail and to what extent such monitoring occurred.
Ironically, any retaliation against the employees would directly contradict the commissioner’s promise during her 2009 confirmation hearing that she would protect whistleblowers by “creating a culture that enables all voices to be heard.”
The FDA has a huge responsibility to protect public health and safety. With all the important work that needs to be done on that front, it’s hard to see how managers apparently thought it was a good use of time to shadow agency scientists and monitor their email accounts for legally protected communications with Congress. If the agency is stifling alternative points of view, that’s the opposite of “a culture that enables all voices to be heard.”
Monday, Feb. 6, 2012