Over the past year, many organisations have experienced a significant increase in the number, length and complexity of workplace complaints.

At the same time, employees now have access to artificial intelligence tools capable of producing sophisticated submissions containing references to governance concerns, regulatory failures, health and safety risks, procedural unfairness and alleged legal breaches.

As a result, managers and HR professionals are increasingly asking an important question:

Is this genuinely a protected disclosure, or is it really a grievance dressed up as a protected disclosure?

Getting the answer wrong can create significant organisational risk.

Why This Matters

The Protected Disclosures Act is designed to encourage workers to report concerns about wrongdoing that are in the public interest.

However, not every workplace concern is a protected disclosure.

Many organisations are now receiving submissions with titles such as:

• Protected Disclosure Regarding Governance Failures
• Whistleblowing Report Concerning Regulatory Breaches
• Protected Disclosure Regarding Serious Mismanagement

Yet on closer examination, the central issue may relate to:

• A promotion decision.
• A performance rating.
• A disciplinary outcome.
• A dispute with a manager.
• A workplace relationship issue.

These matters may be genuine concerns, but they do not automatically become protected disclosures simply because they are labelled as such.

The Most Common Mistake

One of the biggest mistakes employers make is allowing the title of the document to determine the process.

Employers sometimes assume that if an employee uses the words “Protected Disclosure” then a formal protected disclosure investigation must automatically follow.

That is not necessarily the case.

The legislation focuses on the substance of the information being disclosed rather than the label attached to the communication. A qualifying disclosure must relate to information which the worker reasonably believes tends to show relevant wrongdoing.

The question is therefore: What information has actually been provided? Not What has the employee called it?

The AI Factor

Artificial intelligence is making this assessment more challenging.

AI tools can rapidly generate submissions containing references to:

• Regulatory breaches.
• Governance failures.
• Health and safety risks.
• Data protection concerns.
• Mismanagement.
• Legal obligations.

The presence of this language can create the impression that a disclosure concerns serious wrongdoing.

However, employers still need to examine whether actual information tending to show wrongdoing has been provided. Recent assessment methodologies used in practice emphasise distinguishing information and first-hand observations from mere assertions or dissatisfaction.

A Practical Assessment Framework

When a potential protected disclosure is received, employers should consider five questions.

1. Is the Individual a Relevant Person?

The legislation protects a broad range of workers, including current and former employees and others connected with the workplace. Employers need to be aware that “workers” extends beyond traditional employees.

2. Does the Submission Contain Information?

A protected disclosure should contain information.

Examples might include:

• Specific observations.
• Particular incidents.
• Identifiable events.
• Evidence-based concerns.

General allegations without supporting information may not satisfy the threshold.

3. Does the Information Tend to Show Relevant Wrongdoing?

Employers should assess whether the issues raised potentially relate to recognised categories of wrongdoing such as:

• Breach of legal obligations.
• Health and safety risks.
• Data protection failures.
• Misuse of funds.
• Other forms of relevant wrongdoing.

4. Is the Worker Raising a Personal Employment Issue?

This is often where confusion arises.

Many protected disclosure policies specifically state that concerns relating solely to an individual’s own employment circumstances should normally be dealt with through grievance, dignity at work or other employment procedures.

Employers should therefore consider whether the concern is:

• Primarily personal; or
• Primarily about organisational wrongdoing.

The distinction is critical.

5. What Is the Appropriate Next Step?

Not every disclosure requires a full formal investigation.

• A preliminary assessment may identify that the matter would be more appropriately addressed through:
• A grievance process.
• A Dignity at Work procedure.
• A management intervention.
• A targeted operational review.
• A formal protected disclosure investigation.

Proportionate responses are often the most effective responses.

Managers and HR are increasingly finding themselves involved where disclosures contain references to governance, risk, compliance or regulatory issues.

The challenge is ensuring that genuine concerns receive appropriate protection while also ensuring that employment disputes are managed through the correct procedures.

An organisation that treats every grievance as a protected disclosure may create unnecessary complexity.

An organisation that dismisses a genuine protected disclosure as a grievance may create significant legal and reputational risk.

The assessment stage has therefore become one of the most important governance controls within the entire protected disclosure framework.