Question 1

Under 1991.102(a), what actions by an employer are prohibited against a covered individual who engages in protected antitrust disclosure or cooperation activities?

Accepted Answer

The employer may not discharge, demote, suspend, threaten, harass, or retaliate in any other way against the covered individual for protected acts. Under §1991.102(a) the rule explicitly lists examples such as intimidating, restraining, coercing, blacklisting, or disciplining a covered individual in the terms and conditions of employment for doing lawful acts described in paragraph (b).

Question 2

Under 1991.102(b), what kinds of actions by a worker are protected from retaliation?

Accepted Answer

Covered individuals are protected from retaliation for any lawful act done to provide information or assist in Federal investigations or proceedings related to antitrust violations or related criminal laws. See §1991.102(b)) and the related subparagraphs for the specific types of protected activity, including providing information, causing information to be provided, filing, testifying, participating, or otherwise assisting a federal investigation or proceeding.

Question 3

Under 1991.102(b)(1), can a covered individual report suspected antitrust violations to their supervisor and remain protected?

Accepted Answer

Yes — a covered individual is protected if they provide information to a person with supervisory authority or any other person at the employer who can investigate, discover, or terminate misconduct. See §1991.102(b)(1)(1)) and its examples in §1991.102(b)(1)(i)(1)(i)) when the report is about an actual violation or a reasonable belief of a violation of the antitrust laws.

Question 4

Under 1991.102(b)(1)(ii), does reporting a suspected non-antitrust crime that occurred alongside an antitrust issue qualify for protection?

Accepted Answer

Yes — reporting a suspected criminal law violation that the covered individual reasonably believes was committed in conjunction with a potential antitrust violation or with a DOJ investigation is protected. See §1991.102(b)(1)(ii)(1)(ii)) which covers information provided about such criminal violations.

Question 5

Under 1991.102(b)(2), is assisting or participating in a Federal Government investigation or proceeding protected conduct?

Accepted Answer

Yes — causing to be filed, testifying in, participating in, or otherwise assisting a Federal Government investigation or proceeding about antitrust violations (or related criminal laws) is protected. See §1991.102(b)(2)(2)) and its subparts §1991.102(b)(2)(i)(2)(i)) and §1991.102(b)(2)(ii)(2)(ii)).

Question 6

Under 1991.102(b)(3), are purely civil antitrust violations protected?

Accepted Answer

No — the term "violation" for the antitrust laws does not include civil violations that are not also criminal violations. See §1991.102(b)(3)(3)); protection is tied to violations that are criminal or reasonably believed to be criminal in connection with antitrust enforcement.

Question 7

Under 1991.102(b)(4), when does the protection not apply because the covered individual was involved in wrongdoing?

Accepted Answer

Protection does not apply if the covered individual planned and initiated the violation or attempted violation of the antitrust laws, or planned and initiated a related criminal law violation or obstruction of a DOJ investigation. See §1991.102(b)(4)(4)) and its exclusions at §1991.102(b)(4)(i)(4)(i)), §1991.102(b)(4)(ii)(4)(ii)), and §1991.102(b)(4)(iii)(4)(iii)).

Question 8

Under 1991.102, if an employee reasonably believes an act is an antitrust violation but is later proven wrong, are they still protected from retaliation?

Accepted Answer

Yes — a covered individual is protected for providing information about any act or omission they reasonably believe to be a violation of the antitrust laws. See §1991.102(b)(1)(i)(1)(i)) and §1991.102(b)(2)(i)(2)(i)) which protect reports made with a reasonable belief of wrongdoing, even if the belief later proves incorrect, provided the reporter did not plan or initiate the violation.

Question 9

Under 1991.102, can a covered individual be protected for reporting to a Federal agency rather than to someone at their company?

Accepted Answer

Yes — providing information to the Federal Government is specifically protected under the rule. See §1991.102(b)(1)(1)) which covers providing information to the Federal Government as well as to persons within the employer who have authority to address misconduct.

Question 10

Under 1991.102, does protection cover filing or participating in a Federal proceeding that the employer did not yet know about?

Accepted Answer

Protection covers causing to be filed, testifying in, or otherwise assisting Federal Government investigations or proceedings that are filed or about to be filed with any knowledge of the employer. See §1991.102(b)(2)(2)) and its language at §1991.102(b)(2)(i)(2)(i)).

Question 11

Under 1991.102, are informal communications (like emails or notes) to a supervisor about suspected antitrust collusion protected?

Accepted Answer

Yes — informal communications that provide information to a supervisor or another person within the employer who can investigate or take action are protected if they relate to suspected antitrust violations or a reasonable belief of such violations. See §1991.102(b)(1)(1)) and §1991.102(b)(1)(i)(1)(i)).

Question 12

Under 1991.102, if an employee helps the DOJ by giving documents, is that assistance protected even if the documents are company records?

Accepted Answer

Yes — causing information to be provided or otherwise assisting a Federal Government investigation or proceeding is protected conduct under the rule. See §1991.102(b)(1)(1)) and §1991.102(b)(2)(2)). The exclusion at §1991.102(b)(4)(4)) still applies if the employee planned and initiated the wrongdoing.

Question 13

Under 1991.102, does 'retaliate' include changes to job terms such as hours or assignments?

Accepted Answer

Yes — retaliation can include adverse changes in the terms and conditions of employment, which covers changes like hours, assignments, pay, or other employment terms. §1991.102(a) defines prohibited retaliation broadly and lists effects on terms and conditions of employment among the prohibited actions.

Question 14

Under 1991.102(b)(4)(iii), are employees who attempt to obstruct a DOJ investigation excluded from protection even if they later report other wrongdoing?

Accepted Answer

Yes — an individual who planned and initiated an obstruction or attempted obstruction of a Department of Justice investigation of antitrust violations is not covered by the protections for those obstructive acts. See §1991.102(b)(4)(iii)(4)(iii)). Protection for other, unrelated lawful reporting may still apply unless it is tied to the obstructive conduct described in the exclusion.

Question 15

Under 1991.102, can an employer discipline someone for violating company confidentiality rules if the employee was making a protected antitrust report?

Accepted Answer

Disciplining an employee for violating confidentiality rules may still be unlawful retaliation if the discipline is because the employee engaged in protected reporting or assistance under the rule. §1991.102(a) protects lawful acts described in paragraph (b), and §1991.102(b)(1)(1)) covers providing information to the Federal Government or an authorized person at the employer. However, legitimate, consistently applied, and unrelated disciplinary policies may still be enforced if the discipline was not motivated by the protected activity.

Antitrust retaliation protections

Questions & Answers