EnglishEspañol

Leyes Federales de Protección a Denunciantes: Protecciones y Como Reportar

Leyes Federales de Protección a Denunciantes: Protecciones y Como Reportar

Actualizaciones

Se corrigió la recompensa para denunciantes bajo la False Claims Act a un rango de 15 a 25 por ciento cuando el gobierno interviene, se reemplazó una cifra de sanción por reclamo desactualizada por el rango vigente ajustado por inflación, y se actualizó la cita del contratista de defensa a 10 U.S.C. 4701 tras su renumeración. Se corrigió la cita de protección a denunciantes de seguridad alimentaria a 21 U.S.C. 399d, la sección que realmente contiene esa protección. Se corrigió el programa de recompensas del IRS para mostrar sus dos umbrales, ya que la prueba de $2,000,000 en fondos no es la única, pues el ingreso bruto de un contribuyente individual también debe superar los $200,000. Se añadió el límite del 10 por ciento que aplica a las reclamaciones del IRS basadas en información ya pública, el remedio de restitución y salario retroactivo de la Longshore Act para el trabajador, y los requisitos de deliberación (willfulness) y condena para las sanciones penales bajo la Fair Labor Standards Act. Se añadió cobertura de los programas de recompensas para denunciantes de la SEC y el IRS, se corrigió el nombre de la Surface Transportation Assistance Act, y se reparó un enlace roto a la guía de protección a denunciantes de los 50 estados. Todos los enlaces estatutarios ahora apuntan al sitio oficial del U.S. Code.

Verificado de forma independiente contra las fuentes primarias citadas

La ley detrás de este artículo

Este artículo se apoya en 15 disposiciones legales conservadas en nuestro propio registro jurídico, cada una obtenida de la fuente oficial. Toque una sección para leer el texto vigente.

United States Code Title 10

§ 4701Contractor employees: protection from reprisal for disclosure of certain informationVigente
An employee of a contractor, subcontractor, grantee, or subgrantee or personal services contractor may not be discharged, demoted, or otherwise discriminated against as a reprisal for disclosing to a person or body described in paragraph (2) information that the employee reasonably believes is evidence of the following: Gross mismanagement of a Department of Defense contract or grant, a gross waste of Department funds, an abuse of authority relating to a Department contract or grant, or a violation of law, rule, or regulation related to a Department contract (including the competition for or negotiation of a contract) or grant. Gross mismanagement of a National Aeronautics and Space Administration contract or grant, a gross waste of Administration funds, an abuse of authority relating to an Administration contract or grant, or a violation of law, rule, or regulation related to an Administration contract (including the competition for or negotiation of a contract) or grant. A substantial and specific danger to public health or safety.

Texto oficial (extracto) · al 2026-07-28 · Lea la sección completa en uscode.house.gov

Citada en 12 opiniones judicialesAplicada por un tribunal por última vez: 2026

Casos destacados: Sana Kappouta v. Valiant Integrated Services (Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 2023, 60 F.4th 1213) · Andresen v. Intepros Federal, Inc (District Court, District of Columbia 2024) · Wykosky v. Atcs, P.L.L.C. (District Court, District of Columbia 2023)

Identificado automáticamente a partir de las opiniones judiciales que citan esta sección; no es un ranking de qué caso prevalece.

United States Code Title 21

§ 399dEmployee protectionsVigente
No entity engaged in the manufacture, processing, packing, transporting, distribution, reception, holding, or importation of food may discharge an employee or otherwise discriminate against an employee with respect to compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment because the employee, whether at the employee’s initiative or in the ordinary course of the employee’s duties (or any person acting pursuant to a request of the employee)— provided, caused to be provided, or is about to provide or cause to be provided to the employer, the Federal Government, or the attorney general of a State information relating to any violation of, or any act or omission the employee reasonably believes to be a violation of any provision of this chapter or any order, rule, regulation, standard, or ban under this chapter, or any order, rule, regulation, standard, or ban under this chapter; 1  So in original.

Texto oficial (extracto) · al 2026-07-28 · Lea la sección completa en uscode.house.gov

Citada en 25 opiniones judiciales2010s: 92020s: 16Aplicada por un tribunal por última vez: 2026

Casos destacados: Chase v. Brothers International Food Corp. (District Court, W.D. New York 2014, 3 F. Supp. 3d 49) · Wilson v. Commissioner (Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 2013, 705 F.3d 980) · Sylvia Singletary v. Howard University (Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit 2019, 939 F.3d 287)

Identificado automáticamente a partir de las opiniones judiciales que citan esta sección; no es un ranking de qué caso prevalece.

United States Code Title 26

§ 7623Expenses of detection of underpayments and fraud, etc.Vigentecitada en 2 de nuestros artículos
The Secretary, under regulations prescribed by the Secretary, is authorized to pay such sums as he deems necessary for— detecting underpayments of tax, or detecting and bringing to trial and punishment persons guilty of violating the internal revenue laws or conniving at the same, in cases where such expenses are not otherwise provided for by law. Any amount payable under the preceding sentence shall be paid from the proceeds of amounts collected by reason of the information provided, and any amount so collected shall be available for such payments. If the Secretary proceeds with any administrative or judicial action described in subsection (a) based on information brought to the Secretary’s attention by an individual, such individual shall, subject to paragraph (2), receive as an award at least 15 percent but not more than 30 percent of the proceeds collected as a result of the action (including any related actions) or from any settlement in response to such action (determined without regard to whether such proceeds are available to the Secretary).

Texto oficial (extracto) · al 2026-07-28 · Lea la sección completa en uscode.house.gov

Citada en 108 opiniones judiciales1960s: 21970s: 31980s: 31990s: 182000s: 152010s: 182020s: 49Aplicada por un tribunal por última vez: 2026

Casos destacados: Cambridge v. United States (Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 2009, 558 F.3d 1331) · Mandy Li v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue (Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit 2022, 22 F.4th 1014) · Myers v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue Service (Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit 2019, 928 F.3d 1025)

Identificado automáticamente a partir de las opiniones judiciales que citan esta sección; no es un ranking de qué caso prevalece.

United States Code Title 29

§ 215Prohibited acts; prima facie evidenceVigente
After the expiration of one hundred and twenty days from June 25, 1938, it shall be unlawful for any person— to transport, offer for transportation, ship, deliver, or sell in commerce, or to ship, deliver, or sell with knowledge that shipment or delivery or sale thereof in commerce is intended, any goods in the production of which any employee was employed in violation of section 206 or section 207 of this title, or in violation of any regulation or order of the Secretary issued under section 214 of this title; except that no provision of this chapter shall impose any liability upon any common carrier for the transportation in commerce in the regular course of its business of any goods not produced by such common carrier, and no provision of this chapter shall excuse any common carrier from its obligation to accept any goods for transportation; and except that any such transportation, offer, shipment, delivery, or sale of such goods by a purchaser who acquired them in good faith in reliance on written assurance from the producer that the goods were produced in compliance with the requirements of this chapter, and who acquired such goods for value without notice of any such…

Texto oficial (extracto) · al 2026-07-28 · Lea la sección completa en uscode.house.gov

Citada en 1,632 opiniones judiciales1940s: 791950s: 401960s: 521970s: 761980s: 1171990s: 1732000s: 2132010s: 3402020s: 542Aplicada por un tribunal por última vez: 2026

Casos destacados: Frank L. LOEB, Plaintiff, v. TEXTRON, INC., Et Al., Defendants (Court of Appeals for the First Circuit 1979, 600 F.2d 1003) · United States v. Universal C. I. T. Credit Corp. (Supreme Court of the United States 1952, 344 U.S. 218) · Mitchell v. Robert DeMario Jewelry, Inc. (Supreme Court of the United States 1960, 361 U.S. 288)

Identificado automáticamente a partir de las opiniones judiciales que citan esta sección; no es un ranking de qué caso prevalece.

§ 216PenaltiesVigente
Any person who willfully violates any of the provisions of section 215 of this title shall upon conviction thereof be subject to a fine of not more than $10,000, or to imprisonment for not more than six months, or both. No person shall be imprisoned under this subsection except for an offense committed after the conviction of such person for a prior offense under this subsection. Any employer who violates the provisions of section 206 or section 207 of this title shall be liable to the employee or employees affected in the amount of their unpaid minimum wages, or their unpaid overtime compensation, as the case may be, and in an additional equal amount as liquidated damages. Any employer who violates the provisions of section 215(a)(3) or 218d of this title shall be liable for such legal or equitable relief as may be appropriate to effectuate the purposes of section 215(a)(3) or 218d of this title, including without limitation employment, reinstatement, promotion, and the payment of wages lost and an additional equal amount as liquidated damages.

Texto oficial (extracto) · al 2026-07-28 · Lea la sección completa en uscode.house.gov

Citada en 9,526 opiniones judiciales1930s: 31940s: 2941950s: 941960s: 1311970s: 3191980s: 7041990s: 8032000s: 9732010s: 18222020s: 4383Aplicada por un tribunal por última vez: 2026

Casos destacados: Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. v. Wilderness Society (Supreme Court of the United States 1975, 421 U.S. 240) · Roadway Express, Inc. v. Piper (Supreme Court of the United States 1980, 447 U.S. 752) · Hutto v. Finney (Supreme Court of the United States 1979, 437 U.S. 678)

Identificado automáticamente a partir de las opiniones judiciales que citan esta sección; no es un ranking de qué caso prevalece.

United States Code Title 31

§ 3729False claimsVigentecitada en 4 de nuestros artículos
Subject to paragraph (2), any person who— knowingly presents, or causes to be presented, a false or fraudulent claim for payment or approval; knowingly makes, uses, or causes to be made or used, a false record or statement material to a false or fraudulent claim; conspires to commit a violation of subparagraph (A), (B), (D), (E), (F), or (G); has possession, custody, or control of property or money used, or to be used, by the Government and knowingly delivers, or causes to be delivered, less than all of that money or property; is authorized to make or deliver a document certifying receipt of property used, or to be used, by the Government and, intending to defraud the Government, makes or delivers the receipt without completely knowing that the information on the receipt is true; knowingly buys, or receives as a pledge of an obligation or debt, public property from an officer or employee of the Government, or a member of the Armed Forces, who lawfully may not sell or pledge property; or knowingly makes, uses, or causes to be made or used, a false record or statement material to an obligation to pay or transmit money or property to the Government, or knowingly conceals or knowingly…

Texto oficial (extracto) · al 2026-07-28 · Lea la sección completa en uscode.house.gov

Citada en 4,595 opiniones judiciales1980s: 771990s: 5022000s: 8472010s: 14292020s: 1740Aplicada por un tribunal por última vez: 2026

Casos destacados: United States v. Halper (Supreme Court of the United States 1989, 490 U.S. 435) · Vermont Agency of Natural Resources v. United States Ex Rel. Stevens (Supreme Court of the United States 2000, 529 U.S. 765) · United States v. Ursery (Supreme Court of the United States 1996, 518 U.S. 267)

Identificado automáticamente a partir de las opiniones judiciales que citan esta sección; no es un ranking de qué caso prevalece.

§ 3730Civil actions for false claimsVigentecitada en 3 de nuestros artículos
The Attorney General diligently shall investigate a violation under section 3729. If the Attorney General finds that a person has violated or is violating section 3729, the Attorney General may bring a civil action under this section against the person. A person may bring a civil action for a violation of section 3729 for the person and for the United States Government. The action shall be brought in the name of the Government. The action may be dismissed only if the court and the Attorney General give written consent to the dismissal and their reasons for consenting. A copy of the complaint and written disclosure of substantially all material evidence and information the person possesses shall be served on the Government pursuant to Rule 4(d)(4) 1  So in original. Probably should be a reference to Rule 4(i). of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The complaint shall be filed in camera, shall remain under seal for at least 60 days, and shall not be served on the defendant until the court so orders. The Government may elect to intervene and proceed with the action within 60 days after it receives both the complaint and the material evidence and information.

Texto oficial (extracto) · al 2026-07-28 · Lea la sección completa en uscode.house.gov

Citada en 3,695 opiniones judiciales1980s: 361990s: 4342000s: 7332010s: 11382020s: 1354Aplicada por un tribunal por última vez: 2026

Casos destacados: United States v. Halper (Supreme Court of the United States 1989, 490 U.S. 435) · Timson v. Sampson (Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit 2008, 518 F.3d 870) · City of New York v. Mickalis Pawn Shop, LLC (Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit 2011, 645 F.3d 114)

Identificado automáticamente a partir de las opiniones judiciales que citan esta sección; no es un ranking de qué caso prevalece.

United States Code Title 33

§ 948aDiscrimination against employees who bring proceedings; penalties; deposit of payments in special fund; civil actions; entitlement to restoration of employment and compensation, qualifications requirement; liability of employer for penalties and payments; insurance policy exemption from liabilityVigente
It shall be unlawful for any employer or his duly authorized agent to discharge or in any other manner discriminate against an employee as to his employment because such employee has claimed or attempted to claim compensation from such employer, or because he has testified or is about to testify in a proceeding under this chapter. The discharge or refusal to employ a person who has been adjudicated to have filed a fraudulent claim for compensation is not a violation of this section. Any employer who violates this section shall be liable to a penalty of not less than $1,000 or more than $5,000, as may be determined by the deputy commissioner. All such penalties shall be paid to the deputy commissioner for deposit in the special fund as described in section 944 of this title, and if not paid may be recovered in a civil action brought in the appropriate United States district court.

Texto oficial (extracto) · al 2026-07-28 · Lea la sección completa en uscode.house.gov

Citada en 44 opiniones judiciales1980s: 141990s: 102000s: 52010s: 132020s: 2Aplicada por un tribunal por última vez: 2025

Casos destacados: Sickle v. Torres Advanced Enter. Solutions, LLC (Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit 2018, 884 F.3d 338) · Daniel Brink v. Continental Insurance Company (Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit 2015, 787 F.3d 1120) · Francis v. Geddes, Jr. v. Benefits Review Board United States Department of Labor, Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, Intervenor (Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit 1984, 735 F.2d 1412)

Identificado automáticamente a partir de las opiniones judiciales que citan esta sección; no es un ranking de qué caso prevalece.

United States Code Title 42

§ 7622Employee protectionVigente
No employer may discharge any employee or otherwise discriminate against any employee with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment because the employee (or any person acting pursuant to a request of the employee)— commenced, caused to be commenced, or is about to commence or cause to be commenced a proceeding under this chapter or a proceeding for the administration or enforcement of any requirement imposed under this chapter or under any applicable implementation plan, testified or is about to testify in any such proceeding, or assisted or participated or is about to assist or participate in any manner in such a proceeding or in any other action to carry out the purposes of this chapter. Any employee who believes that he has been discharged or otherwise discriminated against by any person in violation of subsection (a) may, within thirty days after such violation occurs, file (or have any person file on his behalf) a complaint with the Secretary of Labor (hereinafter in this subsection referred to as the “Secretary”) alleging such discharge or discrimination.

Texto oficial (extracto) · al 2026-07-28 · Lea la sección completa en uscode.house.gov

Citada en 80 opiniones judiciales1980s: 81990s: 172000s: 392010s: 112020s: 5Aplicada por un tribunal por última vez: 2022

Casos destacados: William Castle v. Eurofresh, Inc. (Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 2013) · GREGORY C. SASSÉ v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE (Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit 2005, 409 F.3d 773) · Hugh Kaufman v. Thomas Perez (Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit 2014)

Identificado automáticamente a partir de las opiniones judiciales que citan esta sección; no es un ranking de qué caso prevalece.

United States Code Title 49

§ 31105Employee protectionsVigente
A person may not discharge an employee, or discipline or discriminate against an employee regarding pay, terms, or privileges of employment, because— the employee, or another person at the employee’s request, has filed a complaint or begun a proceeding related to a violation of a commercial motor vehicle safety or security regulation, standard, or order, or has testified or will testify in such a proceeding; or the person perceives that the employee has filed or is about to file a complaint or has begun or is about to begin a proceeding related to a violation of a commercial motor vehicle safety or security regulation, standard, or order; the employee refuses to operate a vehicle because— the operation violates a regulation, standard, or order of the United States related to commercial motor vehicle safety, health, or security; or the employee has a reasonable apprehension of serious injury to the employee or the public because of the vehicle’s hazardous safety or security condition; the employee accurately reports hours on duty pursuant to chapter 315; the employee cooperates, or the person perceives that the employee is about to cooperate, with a safety or security investigation…

Texto oficial (extracto) · al 2026-07-28 · Lea la sección completa en uscode.house.gov

Citada en 148 opiniones judiciales1990s: 182000s: 332010s: 472020s: 50Aplicada por un tribunal por última vez: 2026

Casos destacados: Copart, Inc. v. Administrative Review Board (Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit 2007, 495 F.3d 1197) · Calmat Company v. U.S. Department of Labor, Administrative Review Board Robert E. Germann (Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 2004, 364 F.3d 1117) · Peacock v. Suffolk Bus Corp. (District Court, E.D. New York 2015, 100 F. Supp. 3d 225)

Identificado automáticamente a partir de las opiniones judiciales que citan esta sección; no es un ranking de qué caso prevalece.

United States Code Title 5

§ 1214Investigation of prohibited personnel practices; corrective actionVigente
The Special Counsel shall receive any allegation of a prohibited personnel practice and shall investigate the allegation to the extent necessary to determine whether there are reasonable grounds to believe that a prohibited personnel practice has occurred, exists, or is to be taken. Within 15 days after the date of receiving an allegation of a prohibited personnel practice under paragraph (1), the Special Counsel shall provide written notice to the person who made the allegation that— the allegation has been received by the Special Counsel; and shall include the name of a person at the Office of Special Counsel who shall serve as a contact with the person making the allegation.

Texto oficial (extracto) · al 2026-07-28 · Lea la sección completa en uscode.house.gov

Citada en 839 opiniones judiciales1990s: 662000s: 802010s: 2632020s: 430Aplicada por un tribunal por última vez: 2026

Casos destacados: Dwyne Chambers v. Department of Homeland Security (Merit Systems Protection Board 2022, 2022 MSPB 8) · Donald B. Ellison v. Merit Systems Protection Board (Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 1993, 7 F.3d 1031) · Timothy Skarada v. Department of Veterans Affairs (Merit Systems Protection Board 2022, 2022 MSPB 17)

Identificado automáticamente a partir de las opiniones judiciales que citan esta sección; no es un ranking de qué caso prevalece.

§ 1215Disciplinary actionVigente
Except as provided in subsection (b), if the Special Counsel determines that disciplinary action should be taken against any employee for having— committed a prohibited personnel practice, violated the provisions of any law, rule, or regulation, or engaged in any other conduct within the jurisdiction of the Special Counsel as described in section 1216, or knowingly and willfully refused or failed to comply with an order of the Merit Systems Protection Board, the Special Counsel shall prepare a written complaint against the employee containing the Special Counsel’s determination, together with a statement of supporting facts, and present the complaint and statement to the employee and the Board, in accordance with this subsection.

Texto oficial (extracto) · al 2026-07-28 · Lea la sección completa en uscode.house.gov

Citada en 32 opiniones judiciales1990s: 52000s: 112010s: 42020s: 12Aplicada por un tribunal por última vez: 2025

Casos destacados: Larry L. Hathaway v. Merit Systems Protection Board (Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 1992, 981 F.2d 1237) · Frank Eidmann v. Merit Systems Protection Board (Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 1992, 976 F.2d 1400) · Michael J. Costello v. Office of Special Counsel, and Merit Systems Protection Board, Intervenor (Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 1999, 182 F.3d 1372)

Identificado automáticamente a partir de las opiniones judiciales que citan esta sección; no es un ranking de qué caso prevalece.

§ 2105EmployeeVigente
For the purpose of this title, “employee”, except as otherwise provided by this section or when specifically modified, means an officer and an individual who is— appointed in the civil service by one of the following acting in an official capacity— the President; a Member or Members of Congress, or the Congress; a member of a uniformed service; an individual who is an employee under this section; the head of a Government controlled corporation; or an adjutant general designated by the Secretary concerned under section 709(c) of title 32; engaged in the performance of a Federal function under authority of law or an Executive act; and subject to the supervision of an individual named by paragraph (1) of this subsection while engaged in the performance of the duties of his position.

Texto oficial (extracto) · al 2026-07-28 · Lea la sección completa en uscode.house.gov

Citada en 381 opiniones judiciales1960s: 11970s: 261980s: 661990s: 1022000s: 662010s: 552020s: 65Aplicada por un tribunal por última vez: 2026

Casos destacados: Louise J. Hamlet v. The United States (Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 1989, 873 F.2d 1414) · Louise J. Hamlet v. United States (Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 1995, 63 F.3d 1097) · Kramer, Mark Lee v. Rumsfeld, Donald (Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit 2007, 481 F.3d 788)

Identificado automáticamente a partir de las opiniones judiciales que citan esta sección; no es un ranking de qué caso prevalece.

§ 2302Prohibited personnel practicesVigentecitada en 2 de nuestros artículos
For the purpose of this title, “prohibited personnel practice” means any action described in subsection (b). For the purpose of this section— “personnel action” means— an appointment; a promotion; an action under chapter 75 of this title or other disciplinary or corrective action; a detail, transfer, or reassignment; a reinstatement; a restoration; a reemployment; a performance evaluation under chapter 43 of this title or under title 38; a decision concerning pay, benefits, or awards, or concerning education or training if the education or training may reasonably be expected to lead to an appointment, promotion, performance evaluation, or other action described in this subparagraph; a decision to order psychiatric testing or examination; the implementation or enforcement of any nondisclosure policy, form, or agreement; and any other significant change in duties, responsibilities, or working conditions; with respect to an employee in, or applicant for, a covered position in an agency, and in the case of an alleged prohibited personnel practice described in subsection (b)(8), an employee or applicant for employment in a Government corporation as defined in section 9101 of title 31;…

Texto oficial (extracto) · al 2026-07-28 · Lea la sección completa en uscode.house.gov

Citada en 6,745 opiniones judiciales1970s: 11980s: 1841990s: 2302000s: 3492010s: 8912020s: 5090Aplicada por un tribunal por última vez: 2026

Casos destacados: Engquist v. Oregon Department of Agriculture (Supreme Court of the United States 2008, 553 U.S. 591) · Louis A. Carducci v. Donald T. Regan, Secretary, U.S. Treasury Department (Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit 1983, 714 F.2d 171) · Marguerite Pridgen v. Office of Management and Budget (Merit Systems Protection Board 2022, 2022 MSPB 31)

Identificado automáticamente a partir de las opiniones judiciales que citan esta sección; no es un ranking de qué caso prevalece.

§ 7701Appellate proceduresVigente
An employee, or applicant for employment, may submit an appeal to the Merit Systems Protection Board from any action which is appealable to the Board under any law, rule, or regulation. An appellant shall have the right— to a hearing for which a transcript will be kept; and to be represented by an attorney or other representative. Appeals shall be processed in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Board. The Board may hear any case appealed to it or may refer the case to an administrative law judge appointed under section 3105 of this title or other employee of the Board designated by the Board to hear such cases, except that in any case involving a removal from the service, the case shall be heard by the Board, an employee experienced in hearing appeals, or an administrative law judge. The Board, administrative law judge, or other employee (as the case may be) shall make a decision after receipt of the written representations of the parties to the appeal and after opportunity for a hearing under subsection (a)(1) of this section. A copy of the decision shall be furnished to each party to the appeal and to the Office of Personnel Management.

Texto oficial (extracto) · al 2026-07-28 · Lea la sección completa en uscode.house.gov

Citada en 1,755 opiniones judiciales1960s: 11970s: 241980s: 3491990s: 2322000s: 2712010s: 3752020s: 503Aplicada por un tribunal por última vez: 2026

Casos destacados: United States v. Fausto (Supreme Court of the United States 1988, 484 U.S. 439) · Lindahl v. Office of Personnel Management (Supreme Court of the United States 1985, 470 U.S. 768) · Garcia v. Department of Homeland Security (Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 2006, 437 F.3d 1322)

Identificado automáticamente a partir de las opiniones judiciales que citan esta sección; no es un ranking de qué caso prevalece.

Busque en nuestro registro completo de la ley de EE. UU.: 2.1 millones de secciones, todos los estados y la ley federal

Fuentes y referencias

  1. 42 U.S.C. § 7622: protección al empleado bajo la Clean Air Act, plazo de presentación de 30 días(uscode.house.gov).gov
  2. 49 U.S.C. § 31105: protección al empleado de transporte terrestre (STAA), plazo de presentación de 180 días(uscode.house.gov).gov
  3. 10 U.S.C. § 4701: empleados de contratistas, protección contra represalias, quejas ante el Inspector General del DoD o la NASA dentro de tres años (renumerado del § 2409 por la Pub. L. 116-283, vigente desde el 1 de enero de 2022)(uscode.house.gov).gov
  4. 31 U.S.C. § 3729: responsabilidad bajo la False Claims Act, daños triples, y la sanción civil estatutaria de $5,000 a $10,000 ajustada por inflación(uscode.house.gov).gov
  5. 31 U.S.C. § 3730: acciones qui tam y la parte que corresponde al denunciante (relator) (15 a 25 por ciento cuando el gobierno interviene; 25 a 30 por ciento cuando no interviene; no más del 10 por ciento en casos de divulgación pública)(uscode.house.gov).gov
  6. 28 C.F.R. § 85.5: sanciones monetarias civiles ajustadas por inflación del Departamento de Justicia, que muestran $13,946 a $27,894 por reclamo bajo la False Claims Act aplicado después del 12 de febrero de 2024(govinfo.gov).gov
  7. 15 U.S.C. § 78u-6: recompensas para denunciantes de la SEC. La subsección (a)(1) define una acción cubierta como aquella que resulta en sanciones monetarias superiores a $1,000,000, y la (b)(1) fija la recompensa entre el 10 y el 30 por ciento de lo que se haya cobrado de las sanciones impuestas. La subsección (h) establece la reparación por represalia(uscode.house.gov).gov
  8. 26 U.S.C. § 7623: recompensas para denunciantes del IRS. La subsección (b)(1) fija la recompensa obligatoria entre el 15 y el 30 por ciento de los fondos recaudados; la (b)(5) impone dos umbrales acumulativos, el monto en disputa superior a $2,000,000 y, cuando el objetivo es un individuo, un ingreso bruto superior a $200,000 para un año fiscal sujeto a la acción; la (b)(2) limita la recompensa al 10 por ciento cuando la acción se basa principalmente en divulgaciones ya públicas; la (a) es el programa discrecional por debajo de esos umbrales(uscode.house.gov).gov
  9. Oficina de Denunciantes del IRS: las reclamaciones se presentan mediante el Formulario 211, Application for Award for Original Information(irs.gov).gov
  10. 21 U.S.C. § 399d: protecciones al empleado bajo la FDA Food Safety Modernization Act, añadidas por la Pub. L. 111-353, con un plazo de 180 días para presentar una queja ante el Secretario del Trabajo conforme a la subsección (b)(1)(uscode.house.gov).gov
  11. 5 U.S.C. § 2302: prácticas de personal prohibidas. La subsección (a)(2)(C)(i) excluye a las corporaciones gubernamentales, salvo en cuanto a las prácticas descritas en (b)(8) o (b)(9)(A)(i), (B), (C) o (D); la (a)(2)(C)(ii) y (iii) excluyen a las agencias de inteligencia nombradas y a la Oficina de Rendición de Cuentas del Gobierno(uscode.house.gov).gov
  12. 5 U.S.C. § 2105(e): los empleados del Servicio Postal de Estados Unidos y de la Comisión Reguladora Postal se consideran que no son empleados para efectos del Título 5(uscode.house.gov).gov
  13. 5 U.S.C. § 1215(a)(3): las medidas disciplinarias disponibles para una práctica de personal prohibida son remoción, reducción de categoría, inhabilitación por no más de 5 años, suspensión, amonestación, o una sanción civil que no exceda los $1,000. Los honorarios de abogado no están entre ellas(uscode.house.gov).gov
  14. 5 U.S.C. § 1214(g): la acción correctiva puede incluir el reembolso de honorarios de abogado, salario retroactivo y beneficios relacionados, costos médicos, gastos de viaje, y daños compensatorios(uscode.house.gov).gov
  15. 5 U.S.C. § 7701(g): la Junta de Protección al Sistema de Mérito puede exigir que la agencia pague honorarios de abogado razonables a un empleado que prevalece, cuando el pago se justifique en interés de la justicia(uscode.house.gov).gov
  16. 33 U.S.C. § 948a: discriminación contra empleados bajo la LHWCA. La sanción de $1,000 a $5,000 se paga al subcomisionado para su depósito en el fondo especial, y la misma sección exige por separado que el empleado sea restituido a su empleo y compensado por el salario perdido, a menos que haya dejado de estar calificado para el puesto(uscode.house.gov).gov
  17. 29 U.S.C. § 216(a): las sanciones penales de la FLSA aplican a una persona que viola de manera deliberada la sección 215, y solo una vez condenada. Multa de no más de $10,000 o prisión de hasta seis meses, con prisión disponible solo después de una condena previa bajo la misma subsección(uscode.house.gov).gov
  18. 29 U.S.C. § 215(a)(3): disposición antirrepresalia de la FLSA que cubre quejas, procedimientos, testimonio y participación en comités industriales(uscode.house.gov).gov
  19. Programa de Protección a Denunciantes de la OSHA: lista oficial de los estatutos federales cuyas disposiciones antirrepresalia administra la OSHA, que identifica 49 U.S.C. § 31105 como la Surface Transportation Assistance Act y 21 U.S.C. § 399d como la FDA Food Safety Modernization Act(whistleblowers.gov).gov
Compartir: