HLS 12RS-985 ENGROSSED
Page 1 of 3
CODING: Words in struck through type are deletions from existing law; words underscored
are additions.
Regular Session, 2012
HOUSE BILL NO. 364
BY REPRESENTATIVE LEGER
EMPLOYMENT: Provides with respect to an employee's protection against reprisal
AN ACT1
To amend and reenact R.S. 23:967(A), (B), and (C), relative to workplace reprisal; to extend2
the protection for employees; to provide for notice to the employer; to provide3
venues for suit; to provide relative to employee liability; and to provide for related4
matters.5
Be it enacted by the Legislature of Louisiana:6
Section 1. R.S. 23:967(A), (B), and (C) are hereby amended and reenacted to read7
as follows:8
ยง967. Employee protection from reprisal; prohibited practices; remedies9
A. An employer shall not take reprisal against an employee who in good10
faith, and after advising the employer , unless such notification would be futile, of the11
a suspected or known workplace act, practice, or omission that the employee12
reasonably believes is a violation of law or otherwise endangers public health or13
safety:14
(1) Discloses or threatens to disclose a workplace act, or practice, or15
omission that the employee reasonably believes is in violation of state law.16
However, the employee shall not be protected from reprisal if the disclosure was17
made to a competitive business enterprise.18
(2) Provides information to or testifies before any public body conducting19
an investigation, hearing, or inquiry into any workplace act, practice, or omission20
that the employee reasonably believes is a violation of law.21 HLS 12RS-985 ENGROSSED
HB NO. 364
Page 2 of 3
CODING: Words in struck through type are deletions from existing law; words underscored
are additions.
(3) Objects to or refuses to participate in an employment act , or practice, or1
omission that the employee reasonably believes is in violation of law.2
B. An employee may commence a civil action in a district court where the3
violation occurred, where the employee resides, or where the employer maintains4
his principal place of business, against any employer who engages in a practice5
prohibited by Subsection A of this Section. If the court finds the provisions of6
Subsection A of this Section have been violated, the plaintiff may recover from the7
employer damages, reasonable attorney fees, and court costs.8
C. For the purposes of this Section, the following terms shall have the9
definitions ascribed below:10
(2) (1) "Damages" include compensatory damages, back pay, benefits,11
reinstatement, reasonable attorney fees, and court costs resulting from the reprisal.12
(2) "Law" includes any federal, state, or local statute, ordinance, rule, or13
regulation.14
(1) (3) "Reprisal" includes firing, layoff, loss of benefits, or any15
discriminatory retaliatory action the court finds was taken as a result of an action by16
the employee that is protected under Subsection A of this Section; however, nothing17
in this Section shall prohibit an employer from enforcing an established employment18
policy, procedure, or practice or exempt an employee from compliance with such.19
* * *20
DIGEST
The digest printed below was prepared by House Legislative Services. It constitutes no part
of the legislative instrument. The keyword, one-liner, abstract, and digest do not constitute
part of the law or proof or indicia of legislative intent. [R.S. 1:13(B) and 24:177(E)]
Leger HB No. 364
Abstract: Provides for protection against workplace reprisal for employees who report
employer violations of federal, state, or local law, or endangerment to public health
or safety.
Present law prohibits an employer from acting in a retaliatory manner or taking reprisal
against an employee who in good faith discloses or threatens to disclose a workplace act,
practice, or omission that is a violation of law; provides information to or testifies before any
public body conducting an investigation, hearing, or inquiry into any potential violation of HLS 12RS-985 ENGROSSED
HB NO. 364
Page 3 of 3
CODING: Words in struck through type are deletions from existing law; words underscored
are additions.
law; or objects to or refuses to participate in a workplace act, practice, or omission that is a
violation of law.
Proposed law extends protection for a disclosure of any such workplace act, practice, or
omission that an employee reasonably believes is in violation of any federal, state, or local
law, statute, ordinance, or rule or regulation, or otherwise endangers public health or safety.
Present law requires that an employee first notify the employe r of a violation of law prior
to protection from disclosure.
Proposed law provides an exception to the employer notification requirement in present law
when the notification would be futile.
Present law provides that an employee may only bring suit for reprisal in the district court
in which the violation occurred.
Proposed law extends present law to allow an employee to bring suit for reprisal in the
district court where the complainant resides, or the employer maintains his principal place
of business.
Present law provides that an employer may not take reprisal, which means firing, laying off,
reducing benefits, or taking discriminatory action against an employee for engaging in
protected disclosure activities.
Proposed law extends present law by defining reprisal as firing, laying off, reducing benefits,
or taking any retaliatory action against an employee for engaging in protected disclosure
activities.
(Amends R.S. 23:967(A), (B), and (C))
Summary of Amendments Adopted by House
Committee Amendments Proposed by House Committee on Labor and Industrial
Relations to the original bill.
1. Restored present law to provide that an employer may be entitled to reasonable
attorney fees and court costs from the employee if it is determined by a court that
the employer did not violate the law.