Employee protection bills left out of consideration this Session

A man wants to fire an employee. Ruin a career. Head Offset. Capture control of business. Remove disloyal and toxic worker. Violation of rights and labor code. Abuse of power, political repression.

Legislation that aimed to establish employee protection for those who lodge formal complaints against employers to the Commission on Ethics was not even put up for consideration this Regular Session.

Pensacola Republican Sen. Don Gaetz sponsored a measure (SB 352) that aimed to safeguard employees who disclosed certain information to the Commission.

Naples Republican Rep. Yvette Benarroch filed the House companion bill (HB 495). But neither bill was ever presented or heard by any of their assigned committees.

In a memorandum of legislative recommendations for the 2025 Regular Session published by the Commission in November 2024, protections for whistleblowers were a top priority.

“The Commission believes that the threat of adverse employment or personnel actions in retaliation for a person’s filing of an ethics complaint discourages the filing of valid complaints,” the Commission memo states. “Thus, the Commission seeks the enactment of protections or remedies, akin to those in the ‘Whistle-blowers Act’ … for the benefit of ethics complaints.”

Under the measure, agencies and independent contractors would have been prohibited from dismissing, disciplining or taking adverse personnel actions against employees who reported violations or suspected violations.

This includes breaches of ethics standards, public trust violations and specific state statutes.

Information disclosed to the Commission would have been required to outline any violations or suspected violations of certain standards, including violations of the Florida Constitution or any specific Florida statute provisions.

The bill defined an agency as any state, regional, county, local or municipal governmental entity, whether executive, judicial or legislative.

It included officials, officers, departments, divisions, bureaus, commissions, authorities, political subdivisions, public school districts, Florida College System institutions, and state universities.

Hearings would have been conducted by an impartial panel appointed by the appropriate local governmental authority. The panel would have been required to make a final decision based on findings of fact and conclusions of law.

Employees who faced retaliation would have been able to file complaints, seek administrative remedies or pursue a civil action against an employer within 180 days of the final decision made by the panel if it does not establish an administrative procedure.

Relief would have included back pay, restoration of benefits, compensation for damages and the reimbursement of legal costs.