The num­ber of inde­pend­ent con­tract­ors con­tin­ues to rise. Accord­ing to the Dutch Centraal Bur­eau voor de Stat­istiek 1.25 mil­lion people had a main job as an inde­pend­ent con­tract­or in 2023. That accounts for about 13 per­cent of all work­ers in the Neth­er­lands. Hence, it should come as no sur­prise that inde­pend­ent con­tract­ors too can encounter mal­prac­tices in the work­place. It is not always clear to them how to deal with these issues (accord­ing to intern­al policies), as inde­pend­ent con­tract­ors often lack access to the employ­ee hand­book or oth­er intern­al (com­plaint) pro­ced­ures. What are the key points to con­sider in this case?

Whis­tleblower policy: what does it entail again?
Organ­iz­a­tions with at least 50 employ­ees are required to have an (intern­al) whis­tleblower policy. Since the imple­ment­a­tion of the Whis­tleblower Pro­tec­tion Act (WBK) on 18 Feb­ru­ary 2023, not only employ­ees but also indi­vidu­als who are related to the employ­er in a work-related man­ner can make a pro­tec­ted dis­clos­ure. This includes interns, volun­teers, applic­ants, sup­pli­ers, and of course, inde­pend­ent con­tract­ors.

 

A few key oblig­a­tions from the WBK:

1. Blow­ing the whistle no longer needs to be done intern­ally first. Although fol­low­ing the intern­al route is highly recom­men­ded, dir­ect extern­al report­ing to a com­pet­ent author­ity is now pos­sible.
2. A report can be made both orally and in writ­ing and can also be anonym­ous.
3. Employ­ers are required to register the reports (while obvi­ously com­ply­ing with GDPR).
4. The employ­er must send an acknow­ledg­ment of receipt with­in 7 days and inform­a­tion about the assess­ment of the report (feed­back) with­in 3 months. There is no room for com­pla­cency.
5. A report­er may not be dis­ad­vant­aged in any way for mak­ing a report, such as dis­missal, demo­tion, but also trans­fer, and refus­al of pro­mo­tion or oth­er forms of bul­ly­ing.
6. If a report­er invokes the pro­hib­i­tion of dis­ad­vant­age, the bur­den of proof that the dis­ad­vant­age is not related to the report lies with the employ­er. Thus, there is a shift in the bur­den of proof.
7. A report­er may not be held liable for mak­ing a report. Thus, there is, in prin­ciple, an exemp­tion from leg­al pro­ceed­ings.
8. A report­er may not be pro­hib­ited from mak­ing a report or dis­clos­ing inform­a­tion. So-called gag orders are there­fore null and void.
9. The employ­er must inform employ­ees (in writ­ing or elec­tron­ic­ally) about the intern­al whis­tleblower policy, how a report can be made extern­ally (to com­pet­ent author­it­ies), and about the leg­al pro­tec­tion of the employ­ee when mak­ing a report.

 

Mak­ing the intern­al Whis­tleblower Policy avail­able to inde­pend­ent con­tract­ors
Employ­ers may choose to make the intern­al whis­tleblower policy avail­able to inde­pend­ent con­tract­ors (and oth­er non-employ­ees). In this case, the employ­er must inform the inde­pend­ent con­tract­ors in the same man­ner as applies to employ­ees (see point 9 above).

In prac­tice, we often see that the whis­tleblower policy is not open and vis­ible to inde­pend­ent con­tract­ors. Many organ­iz­a­tions have only opened and pub­lished their intern­al whis­tleblower policy for their employ­ees, for example, by includ­ing the whis­tleblower policy in the employ­ee hand­book or pub­lish­ing it on the intranet.

This will most likely lead to inde­pend­ent con­tract­ors (when encoun­ter­ing mal­prac­tices) report­ing more quickly dir­ectly to a com­pet­ent author­ity, such as the House for Whis­tleblowers. How­ever, employ­ers (and report­ers) can bene­fit from intern­al report­ing. If a safe work­ing envir­on­ment exists, an intern­al report is often more access­ible and effect­ive. Moreover, an intern­al report reduces the chance of inform­a­tion being made pub­lic that could harm the organ­iz­a­tion. By mak­ing the intern­al report­ing pro­ced­ure also avail­able to inde­pend­ent con­tract­ors and act­ively inform­ing them about it, organ­iz­a­tions can reduce the like­li­hood that mal­prac­tices will be escal­ated extern­ally before the organ­iz­a­tion has had a chance to take intern­al action.

 

If there are (many) inde­pend­ent con­tract­ors work­ing in your organ­iz­a­tion, it is advis­able to at least con­sider the fol­low­ing points:

• Make the intern­al whis­tleblower policy avail­able to inde­pend­ent con­tract­ors and expli­citly men­tion this in the policy.
• Inform inde­pend­ent con­tract­ors about the intern­al policy (see point 9 above). Ensure that the whis­tleblower policy is vis­ible and access­ible to inde­pend­ent con­tract­ors, for example, by pub­lish­ing the policy on the web­site.
• Cre­ate suf­fi­cient aware­ness and also emphas­ize the import­ance of intern­al report­ing. Con­sider, for example, reg­u­lar train­ing or inform­a­tion ses­sions on the whis­tleblower policy and the pro­tec­tion it offers.
• Expli­citly name and guar­an­tee pro­tec­tion against dis­ad­vant­age for inde­pend­ent con­tract­ors. This can help build trust in the policy and a poten­tial intern­al report.
• Ensure an open and access­ible cor­por­ate cul­ture where dis­sent is embraced and not pun­ished. This will reduce the urge to report extern­ally.

 

Are you unsure about the con­tent of your whis­tleblower policy or how it can be more effect­ively imple­men­ted in your organ­iz­a­tion? We are of course happy to think along with you.

 

Want to know more about everything related to the top­ic of inde­pend­ent con­tract­ors? Click here!