MediaPost reported WPP is now demanding the New York State Supreme Court not only dismiss the whistleblower lawsuit, but also the whistleblower’s lawyers.
Apparently, the single White operating company isn’t satisfied with simply dismissing thousands of its own workers.
What’s more, WPP wants to go after the whistleblower’s sources and anonymous accomplices, particularly anyone involved in uncovering the Sony Pictures investigation allegedly charging WPP ran a “global crime scheme” through its media practice.
Not sure why WPP is so upset. After all, the company implemented a whistleblower hotline about a decade ago, encouraging employees to call out wrongdoing without fear of retaliation.
The whistleblower hotline was reportedly ringing off the hook in 2023, arguably showing its effectiveness.
Yet today WPP is on the offensive, attacking purported whistleblowers and anyone associated with them.
Hey, if you want to stop whistleblowers, consider avoiding behavior that incites whistleblowing.
Try earning the trust of a worldwide workforce.
WPP Moves To Have Foster’s Lawyers Dismissed, Sony Probe Sources Divulged
By Steve McClellan
WPP is demanding further action by the New York State Supreme Court Judge hearing the wrongful termination suit by former WPP Media (FKA GroupM) executive and purported whistleblower Richard Foster.
Foster has alleged that WPP terminated him after he complained to senior executives at the company that it was systematically misappropriating media rebates that belonged to clients.
Earlier this month in court papers Foster outlined a previously undisclosed investigation by client Sony that exposed a rebate scheme that cost clients hundreds of millions of dollars in China and possibly elsewhere.
While WPP has not disputed the accuracy of Foster’s disclosures, it has asserted that Foster obtained the Sony report by inappropriate means and that all references to it be sealed. The company alleges that Foster and his legal team knew it was unlawful to disclose the Sony probe and separate confidential discussions that Foster had with senior lawyer Nicola McCormick.
In a follow-up motion for oral argument, WPP is now arguing that redacting and sealing those references are not “workable options” to address the harm it has suffered and could suffer in the future.
In addition to dismissing Foster’s amended complaint “with prejudice,” WPP wants monetary sanctions imposed on the plaintiff as well as the dismissal of the law firm, the Brewer Firm and its legal team from having anything more to do with the case.
WPP is also demanding that Foster be ordered to disclose how he obtained information about the Sony investigation, “including when and how it was obtained, its source, all persons who received or reviewed it, and whether and to whom it was further disseminated.”
