Report comment

I would say the SRA's decision is contrary to the parliament's own view on whistleblowing.

I would also say the SRA steps into the shoes of her employer, afterall, SRA is the regulator and in a sense all law firms are "overseen" by them. By subjecting her to a traumatic case, she has been discriminated against due to whistleblowing.

We must be realistic here. Not even a paragon of virtue is going to resign and blow the whistle before they blink.

Importantly, whistleblowers should have been afforded anonymity and safety. What had the employer been up to more no good than she whistleblew for and she faced life threatening repurcussions?

Beyond the whistleblowing I find it absurd that she has been hung to dry because when large firms are intervened the SRA only brings actions against the Directors/Partners not against grunts.