Fred Funderbuck worked as a longtime computer analyst for a series of Federal Contractors, contracting with the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Stringing his time together with various contractors, Fred had worked at the Department of Agriculture for more than 20 years. Fred did his job so long and so well that he barely required input or supervision. When Fred was in his early 60’s, a new Department of Agriculture supervisor entered his world, someone who wanted to know what he did with his time and whether she could “borrow” him to work on certain projects in the computer lab to which he did not have proper security clearance. Fred complied for a time or two, but then complained to other supervisory personnel, both at his contractor job and within the Federal Agency. He made these complaints orally.

The Federal Supervisor became upset with him, and Fred was certain she would cause him to lose his job. This office counseled Fred to put his specific objections in writing to his Department of Agriculture supervisor, with copies to her supervisor and his contractor supervisor. Fred resisted, stating he would lose his job for sure if he issued that letter. We advised Fred he was almost certainly going to be fired anyway, and once he put his complaint in writing, then, if he were later fired, he would have a State of New Jersey “whistleblower” claim, which makes it unlawful and legally actionable for an employer to retaliate against an employee who has registered a complaint of unlawful action, on the reasonable belief that the employer’s misconduct was unlawful.

In this case, Fred complained in writing that his federal supervisor required him to report to a secure lab facility without proper clearance, and that the contractor directed him to falsely report his hours to show that all of his work was in his regular lab, when it was not. Sure enough, as soon as Fred issued his letter, the federal contractor fired him on the spot, the day before Thanksgiving. Our office filed suit immediately, under the New Jersey “whistleblower” statute, seeking back pay, front pay, pain and suffering for aggravation, and counsel fees and costs of suit. After 2 years of discovery production, including written questions and answers, massive document exchanges, and depositions (in-person statements under oath), Fred settled his legal matter for an undisclosed sum, to the employer’s and Fred’s mutual satisfaction.