Former employees and officers of superannuation funds and their service providers should be granted the same level of whistle-blower protections as those still working for funds, according to the Australian Institute of Superannuation Trustees (AIST).
The service providers referred to be the AIST include administrators, custodians, insurers, and actuaries.
In a submission to the Parliamentary Joint Committee review of whistle-blower protections in the corporate, public and not-for-profit sectors, the AIST has argued that the Corporations Act simply does not go far enough in terms of the breadth of people that need protection,
It said one of the major criticisms of the current Corporations Act 2001 whistleblowing framework was that the definition of ‘discloser’ (a whistle-blower) “is too narrow and effectively prevents potential whistle-blowers from receiving adequate protection”.
“The definition of discloser under the act is limited to current company officers and employees as well as contractors and employees of contractors,” the submission said.
“This is a very narrow definition, and provides no incentive for former officers, staff or contractors to come forward to disclose and does not protect disclosers that cease employment throughout the process of making a disclosure.”
The AIST submission said the definition of ‘discloser’ should be expanded in the proposed new framework to encourage greater reporting of wrongdoing and it should include:
- Current and former employees of the registrable superannuation entity (RSE) licensee;
- Current and former officers of the RSE licensee; and
- Current and former contractors of the RSE licensee – that is, persons who have or had a contract of supply of goods or services to the RSE licensee.
The submission said this definition should include staff of outsourced service providers such as actuaries, administrators, insurers, and custodians.
“AIST believes that the views of former employees, officers, and contractors are no less legitimate than the views of incumbents and their insights may be of significant value to an organisation,” it said.
“The expanded definition may also give former parties the courage to report knowing that they would receive protections under the framework.”
