Oregon
Oregon Whistleblower Laws: Protections and How to Report
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited August 20, 2026). · Reviewed by the RecordingLaw editorial team. · Law checked current as of August 20, 2026. · 10 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content

Oregon protects both public and private employees from workplace retaliation for reporting violations of law in good faith. ORS 659A.199 applies to employers generally, including public bodies, and public and nonprofit employees receive additional disclosure protections under ORS 659A.203. Employees need only a good faith belief that a violation occurred, not proof.
Overview of Oregon Whistleblower Laws
Oregon is an employment-at-will state, but the state legislature and courts have created robust protections for employees who report illegal activity, workplace safety hazards, and government misconduct.
Oregon stands out among states for the breadth of its whistleblower protections. The state has at least seven separate whistleblower statutes within ORS Chapter 659A alone, plus additional protections in workplace safety, healthcare, and cannabis regulation statutes. These laws cover both public and private sector employees.
A key feature of Oregon's whistleblower laws is that employees do not need to prove their reports were accurate. They only need to show they had a good faith belief that a violation occurred when they made the report.
Federal whistleblower laws provide additional coverage for Oregon employees. For more information, see the Federal Whistleblower Laws page.
Who Is Protected Under Oregon Whistleblower Laws
Employees of any employer are protected under ORS 659A.199 when they report violations of state or federal law, rule, or regulation in good faith. The Oregon Court of Appeals confirmed in Burley v. Clackamas County, 298 Or App 462 (2019), that the statute reaches public employers as well as private ones.

Public and nonprofit employees receive additional protections under ORS 659A.203, covering reports of legal violations, mismanagement, waste of funds, abuse of authority, and dangers to public health and safety.
All employees are protected under ORS 659A.230 for reporting criminal activity, cooperating with law enforcement, filing civil proceedings, or testifying in criminal cases.
Additional protections apply to healthcare workers, nursing staff, employees in assisted living facilities, adult foster home workers, cannabis industry employees, and others.
Common Law Whistleblower Protections
Oregon courts recognize a public policy exception to the at-will employment doctrine. Employers cannot fire employees for reasons that violate clearly established public policy as expressed in constitutional provisions, statutes, or court decisions.
Oregon common law generally protects employees who:
- Report suspected physical abuse of vulnerable persons
- File workers' compensation claims
- Refuse to commit perjury or provide false testimony
- Refuse to disclose a customer's confidential information in violation of law
- Report dangerous working conditions to the appropriate authorities
- Refuse to make false accusations against a fellow employee
Common law wrongful discharge claims must be filed within two years of the retaliatory action.
General Whistleblower Protections (ORS 659A.199)
Oregon Revised Statute 659A.199 is Oregon's general whistleblower protection statute. It makes it unlawful for any employer to discharge, demote, suspend, or otherwise discriminate or retaliate against an employee who, in good faith, reports information the employee believes is evidence of a violation of state or federal law, rule, or regulation.
Key Features
- The employee does not need to report directly to a supervisor to be protected
- The report does not need to be substantiated; a good faith belief is sufficient
- The protection applies regardless of whether the report leads to any enforcement action
- Protection extends to reporting a wide range of potential violations, including workplace safety issues, harassment, wage and hour violations, and unfair business practices
Scope of Coverage
ORS 659A.199 is not limited to private employers. In Burley v. Clackamas County, 298 Or App 462 (2019), the Oregon Court of Appeals affirmed a jury verdict against a county under this statute, reasoning that ORS 659A.001 defines "employer" to include a public body. Public and nonprofit employees can rely on the separate and broader disclosure provisions of ORS 659A.200 through 659A.224 as well; ORS 659A.203(4) states that its remedies are "in addition to any remedy provided to an employee under ORS 659A.199."
Public Employee Whistleblower Protections (ORS 659A.203)
Public employees and employees of nonprofit organizations receive expanded protections under ORS 659A.203. This statute prohibits any disciplinary action against employees who:
- Discuss the activities of any state agency or representatives with members of the Legislative Assembly, committee staff, or other relevant state representatives
- Disclose information about violations of state or federal law, rule, or regulation by the employer
- Report mismanagement or gross waste of public funds
- Report an abuse of authority
- Report a substantial and specific danger to public health or safety
- Disclose information that a person receiving state services or benefits is subject to an arrest warrant
Employers cannot require employees to notify management before making these disclosures. This is a significant protection that encourages reporting through any channel the employee deems appropriate.
Violation of this statute is a Class A misdemeanor.
Protection for Aiding Criminal or Civil Proceedings (ORS 659A.230)
Under ORS 659A.230, it is unlawful for an employer to discharge, suspend, or discriminate against an employee for:
- Reporting another person's criminal activities in good faith
- Filing or assisting in filing a complaint against another person
- Cooperating with any law enforcement agency conducting a criminal investigation
- Bringing a civil proceeding against the employer
- Testifying in a criminal proceeding or trial
This statute applies to all employers, public and private.
Occupational Safety and Health Protections (ORS 654.062)
The Oregon Safe Employment Act, at ORS 654.062(5), prohibits employers from retaliating against employees who:
- Oppose practices forbidden by the Oregon Safe Employment Act
- File complaints, testify in proceedings, or institute proceedings under safety laws
- Exercise any right under workplace safety laws
- Report assaults that took place at a health care employer's premises or in a patient's home
Under ORS 654.062(6), an employee may file a complaint with the Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor and Industries within one year after the employee has reasonable cause to believe the violation occurred. The 90-day period in that subsection is the commissioner's deadline to notify the complainant of a determination, not the worker's filing window. A civil action under this section must also be commenced within one year.
Oregon OSHA also investigates whistleblower complaints involving workplace safety retaliation.
Additional Statutory Protections
Discrimination (ORS 659A.030)
No person may retaliate against another for opposing unlawful discriminatory practices, filing a complaint, or testifying in proceedings under Oregon's civil rights laws. Protected classes include race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, marital status, and age (18+). Complaints should be filed with the Oregon Civil Rights Division.
Disability Discrimination (ORS 659A.109, 659A.106)
Employers with six or more employees may not retaliate against individuals for applying for benefits, invoking procedures, or giving testimony under Oregon's disability discrimination laws.
Family Leave (ORS 659A.183, 659A.153)
Employers with 25 or more employees may not retaliate against workers for inquiring about, requesting, or exercising rights under Oregon's family leave laws, which cover care for newborns, adopted children, family members with serious health conditions, and bereavement.
Nursing Staff Protections (ORS 441.181-441.186)
Hospitals may not retaliate against nursing staff who report violations of law, rules, or professional standards that pose risks to patient or public safety; provide information during investigations; or participate in peer review processes (ORS 441.181). Nursing staff must generally notify a hospital manager first, unless the manager is already aware of the violation and an emergency exists, or the employee fears physical harm.
Remedies for nursing staff under ORS 441.183 include injunctive relief, reinstatement, back pay with interest, fringe benefits, seniority rights, litigation costs, expert witness fees, attorney's fees, and punitive damages.
Abuse in Assisted Living Facilities (ORS 430.755)
No facility, program, or person may retaliate against anyone for reporting suspected abuse of an assisted living facility resident in good faith. Violators face actual damages plus a penalty of up to $1,000.
Adult Foster Homes (ORS 443.765)
Owners or operators of adult foster homes may not retaliate against employees for filing complaints with the licensing agency or being interviewed about complaints. Civil penalties range from $100 to $250 per violation, or $100 to $1,000 if abuse is substantiated.
Employee Housing (ORS 659A.259)
Employers may not retaliate against employees for filing complaints about employee housing conditions or inviting authorized persons to residential areas. Complaints should be filed with the Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor and Industries.
Leave for Criminal Proceedings (ORS 659A.194)
Employers may not retaliate against employees for taking leave to attend criminal proceedings.
Oregon Military Family Leave Act (ORS 659A.096)
Employers may not retaliate against employees for inquiring about, requesting, or exercising rights under the military family leave act, which provides leave to spouses of active duty military members.
Minimum Wages and Overtime (ORS 653.060)
Employers may not retaliate against employees for inquiring about, filing complaints about, or testifying regarding minimum wage and overtime laws.
Wage Claims (ORS 652.355)
Employers may not retaliate against employees for making wage claims, consulting attorneys about wage issues, instituting proceedings, or reporting maximum working hours violations.
Workers' Compensation (ORS 659A.040)
Employers with more than five employees may not discriminate against workers for filing workers' compensation claims, invoking procedures, or giving testimony under workers' compensation laws.
Cannabis and Psilocybin (ORS 475C.285, ORS 475A.489)
Cannabis licensees may not retaliate against an employee who in good faith reports information to the Oregon Liquor and Cannabis Commission that the employee believes is evidence of a violation of the Adult and Medical Use of Cannabis Act (ORS 475C.285, renumbered from ORS 475B.281 in 2021). A parallel provision, ORS 475A.489, protects employees of psilocybin licensees who report to the Oregon Health Authority. Both sections are enforced under ORS chapter 659A.
How to File a Whistleblower Complaint in Oregon
Oregon offers two main paths for filing whistleblower retaliation complaints:
File with BOLI
The Bureau of Labor and Industries (BOLI) enforces whistleblower protections under ORS Chapter 659A. Complaints must be filed within one year of the retaliatory action.
Contact BOLI at 971-673-0761 or through the Oregon Civil Rights Division website.
File a Civil Action
Employees may also file a civil lawsuit directly in circuit court within one year of the retaliatory action. Under HB 2957 (effective June 24, 2025), once BOLI issues a notice on a complaint, the civil-action window depends on how BOLI resolved it. If BOLI found no substantial evidence of a violation, the employee gets a full one year from the notice if more than a year remained on the original statute of limitations, the remainder of that original period if between 90 days and a year remained, or 90 days if less than 90 days remained. BOLI's handling of a complaint can no longer shrink an employee's filing window below what the statute otherwise provides. Both paths run on a one-year clock, so get a free case evaluation from an Oregon employment lawyer on filing with BOLI or going straight to circuit court (attorney advertising).
Remedies for Whistleblower Retaliation
Under most Oregon whistleblower statutes, a court may award the following relief under ORS 659A.885:
- Injunctive relief to stop the retaliatory conduct
- Reinstatement or hiring with or without back pay
- Costs and reasonable attorney's fees
- Any other equitable relief the court deems appropriate
Back pay may be limited to two years from the date of filing.
Some statutes provide additional remedies. Nursing staff, for example, may receive punitive damages. Facilities that retaliate in assisted living or adult foster home settings face civil penalties.
Federal Whistleblower Protections That Apply in Oregon
Oregon employees also benefit from federal whistleblower statutes, including:
- Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX): Protects employees of publicly traded companies who report securities fraud
- False Claims Act (31 U.S.C. 3729-3733): Allows qui tam lawsuits against entities that defraud federal programs
- OSHA Section 11(c): Protects workers who report workplace safety violations to federal OSHA
- Dodd-Frank Act: Protects employees who report financial or securities fraud to the SEC
- Title VII of the Civil Rights Act: Protects employees from retaliation for reporting discrimination
For more details, visit the Federal Whistleblower Laws page.
Statute of Limitations Summary
| Type of Claim | Filing Deadline | Where to File |
|---|---|---|
| Most ORS 659A claims (BOLI) | 1 year | Bureau of Labor and Industries |
| Civil action (most statutes) | 1 year | Circuit court |
| Common law wrongful discharge | 2 years | Appropriate court |
| Occupational safety (ORS 654.062) | 1 year | BOLI Commissioner |
| Post-BOLI dismissal civil action (HB 2957, eff. 6/24/2025) | Up to 1 year, varies with time remaining on the original deadline | Circuit court |
More Oregon Laws
- Oregon At-Will Employment Laws
- Oregon Employee Monitoring Laws
- Oregon Final Paycheck Laws
- Oregon Workers Compensation Laws
Frequently Asked Questions
Does Oregon protect private sector whistleblowers?
Yes. ORS 659A.199 protects employees from retaliation for reporting, in good faith, information they believe is evidence of a violation of a state or federal law, rule, or regulation. It covers private sector employers, and the Oregon Court of Appeals held in Burley v. Clackamas County (2019) that it applies to public employers too. Additional statutes protect private sector employees in specific contexts such as workplace safety, wage claims, and discrimination.
Do I have to be right about the violation I reported to be protected in Oregon?
No. Oregon law only requires that you have a good faith belief that a violation occurred at the time you made the report. The report does not need to be substantiated, and enforcement authorities do not need to take action on the report for you to be protected from retaliation.
How long do I have to file a whistleblower retaliation complaint in Oregon?
Most complaints filed with the Bureau of Labor and Industries (BOLI) must be submitted within one year of the retaliatory action. Civil lawsuits also generally must be filed within one year. Occupational safety complaints under ORS 654.062 also carry a one-year deadline, measured from when the employee had reasonable cause to believe the violation occurred. Common law claims allow up to two years.
What remedies are available to Oregon whistleblowers who face retaliation?
Remedies typically include injunctive relief, reinstatement with or without back pay, costs, and reasonable attorney's fees. Some statutes provide additional remedies such as punitive damages (for nursing staff) or civil penalties (for assisted living and adult foster home settings). Back pay may be limited to two years from the filing date.
Where do I file a whistleblower complaint in Oregon?
You can file with the Bureau of Labor and Industries (BOLI) at 971-673-0761 or through the Oregon Civil Rights Division. You may also file a civil lawsuit directly in circuit court. For workplace safety complaints, you can contact Oregon OSHA. For discrimination complaints, file with the Oregon Civil Rights Division.
Updates
Corrected the deadline for occupational safety retaliation complaints under ORS 654.062 (one year, not 90 days), clarified that ORS 659A.199 protects public as well as private employees under Burley v. Clackamas County, and replaced the defunct cannabis citation with ORS 475C.285 plus the psilocybin provision ORS 475A.489.
Updated Oregon's post-BOLI-dismissal civil-action deadline to reflect HB 2957 (effective June 24, 2025), which replaced the flat 90-day window with a variable window (up to one year) based on how much of the original filing period remained when BOLI issued its notice, and replaced a dead BOLI whistleblower-manual PDF citation with the current live document.
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources; governing law re-checked for recent changes
Re-cited Oregon's hospital nursing-staff whistleblower protections to the current statute: ORS 441.174 was repealed; the live provisions are ORS 441.181 (retaliation prohibited) and 441.183 (remedies).
Governing law re-checked for recent changes
Reviewed and approved by an editor
The Law Behind This Article
This article rests on the statutory provisions below, held in our own legal record and retrieved from the official source. Tap a section to read the operative text.
Oregon Revised Statutes, Chapter 659A: Unlawful Discrimination in Employment, Public Accommodations and Real Property Transactions; Administrative and Civil Enforcement
§ 659A.199Prohibited conduct by employerIn forcecited in 3 of our articles
(1) It is an unlawful employment practice for an employer to discharge, demote, suspend or in any manner discriminate or retaliate against an employee with regard to promotion, compensation or other terms, conditions or privileges of employment for the reason that the employee has in good faith reported information that the employee believes is evidence of a violation of a state or federal law, rule or regulation. (2) The remedies provided by this chapter are in addition to any common law remedy or other remedy that may be available to an employee for the conduct constituting a violation of this section. [2009 c.524 §2] (Disclosures by Public and Nonprofit Employees)
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-16 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at oregonlegislature.gov
Cited in 108 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Burley v. Clackamas Cnty. (Court of Appeals of Oregon 2019, 298 Or. App. 462)“…nt Clackamas County. The main question on appeal is whether ORS 659A.199, which makes it unlawful for an "employ…”
- Summerfield v. OLCC (Oregon Supreme Court 2020, 366 Or. 763)“…od faith report of what he believed was a violation of law, ORS 659A.199. The trial court granted defendant’s mo…”
- Ossanna v. Nike, Inc. (Court of Appeals of Oregon 2018, 290 Or. App. 16)“…under ORS 654.062(5) ; (2) whistleblower retaliation under ORS 659A.199 ; (3) common law wrongful discharge; an…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Oregon Workplace Recording Laws: Employee and Employer Rights Under Split Consent, Oregon At-Will Employment Laws: Exceptions and Your Rights
§ 659A.203Prohibited conduct by public or nonprofit employer; prohibited conduct by school services employer during public health emergency; remediesIn force
(1) Subject to ORS 659A.206, except as provided in ORS 659A.200 to 659A.224, it is an unlawful employment practice for any public or nonprofit employer to: (a) Prohibit any employee from discussing, either specifically or generally with any member of the Legislative Assembly, legislative committee staff acting under the direction of a member of the Legislative Assembly, any member of the elected governing body of a political subdivision in the state or any elected auditor of a city, county or metropolitan service district, the activities of: (A) The state or any agency of or political subdivision in the state; or (B) Any person authorized to act on behalf of the state or any agency of or political subdivision in the state.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at oregonlegislature.gov
Cited in 65 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Burley v. Clackamas Cnty. (Court of Appeals of Oregon 2019, 298 Or. App. 462)“…ty for unlawful employment practices under ORS 659A.199 and ORS 659A.203, alleging that the county unlawfully re…”
- Love v. Polk County Fire District (Court of Appeals of Oregon 2006, 209 Or. App. 474)“…d alleged a statutory claim, it would have been governed by ORS 659A.203(1). That statute makes it an unlawful e…”
- Huber v. Oregon Department of Education (Court of Appeals of Oregon 2010, 235 Or. App. 230)“…or initiating a civil proceeding; (3) his claim pursuant to ORS 659A.203 for “whistleblowing” — that is, for dis…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 659A.230Discrimination for initiating or aiding in criminal or civil proceedings prohibited; remedies not exclusiveIn forcecited in 2 of our articles
(1) It is an unlawful employment practice for an employer to discharge, demote, suspend or in any manner discriminate or retaliate against an employee with regard to promotion, compensation or other terms, conditions or privileges of employment for the reason that the employee has in good faith reported criminal activity by any person, has in good faith caused a complainant’s information or complaint to be filed against any person, has in good faith cooperated with any law enforcement agency conducting a criminal investigation, has in good faith brought a civil proceeding against an employer or has testified in good faith at a civil proceeding or criminal trial. (2) For the purposes of this section, “complainant’s information” and “complaint” have the meanings given those terms in ORS 131.005. (3) The remedies provided by this chapter are in addition to any common law remedy or other remedy that may be available to an employee for the conduct constituting a violation of this section. [Formerly 659.550]
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at oregonlegislature.gov
Cited in 50 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Livingston v. METROPOLITAN PEDIATRICS, LLC (Court of Appeals of Oregon 2010, 234 Or. App. 137)“…and brought statutory claims of employment discrimination, ORS 659A.230 (whistleblowing), 1 and bl…”
- Huber v. Oregon Department of Education (Court of Appeals of Oregon 2010, 235 Or. App. 230)“…Amendment rights; (2) his claim for retaliation pursuant to ORS 659A.230 for initiating a civil proceeding; (3)…”
- Hall v. State (Court of Appeals of Oregon 2015, 274 Or. App. 445)“…stleblowing statutes, ORS 659A.199, 3 ORS 659A.203, 4 and ORS 659A.230, 5 common-law wrongful discharge, and…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 659A.200Definitions for ORS 659A.200 to 659A.224In force
As used in ORS 659A.200 to 659A.224: (1) “Disciplinary action” includes but is not limited to any discrimination, dismissal, demotion, transfer, reassignment, supervisory reprimand, warning of possible dismissal or withholding of work, whether or not the action affects or will affect employee compensation. (2) “Employee” means a person: (a) Employed by or under contract with the state or any agency of or political subdivision in the state; (b) Employed by or under contract with any person authorized to act on behalf of the state, or agency of the state or subdivision in the state, with respect to control, management or supervision of any employee; (c) Employed by the public corporation created under ORS 656.751; (d) Employed by a contractor who performs services for the state, agency or subdivision, other than employees of a contractor under contract to construct a public improvement; (e) Employed by or under contract with any person authorized by contract to act on behalf of the state, agency or subdivision; (f) Employed by a nonprofit organization; or (g) Serving as a member of a board of directors of a nonprofit organization who is not…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at oregonlegislature.gov
Cited in 12 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Harper v. Mt. Hood Community College (Court of Appeals of Oregon 2016, 283 Or. App. 207)“…authorized to act on behalf of that political subdivision. ORS 659A.200(6). And, an “employee” is defined to in…”
- Dinicola v. State (Court of Appeals of Oregon 2016, 280 Or. App. 488)“…intiff was not employed by the state. At the relevant time, ORS 659A.200(2), 17 provided: “(2) ‘Employee’ mea…”
- Burley v. Clackamas Cnty. (Court of Appeals of Oregon 2019, 298 Or. App. 462)“…ed employer[s]" for purposes of ORS 659A.190 to 659A.198 ); ORS 659A.200(6) (defining "public employer" for purp…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 659A.030Discrimination because of race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, marital status, age or expunged juvenile record prohibitedIn forcecited in 2 of our articles
(1) It is an unlawful employment practice: (a) For an employer, because of an individual’s race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, marital status or age if the individual is 18 years of age or older, or because of the race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, marital status or age of any other person with whom the individual associates, or because of an individual’s juvenile record that has been expunged pursuant to ORS 419A.260 to 419A.271, to refuse to hire or employ the individual or to bar or discharge the individual from employment. However, discrimination is not an unlawful employment practice if the discrimination results from a bona fide occupational qualification reasonably necessary to the normal operation of the employer’s business.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at oregonlegislature.gov
Cited in 267 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Portland State University Chapter of the American Ass'n of University Professors v. Portland State University (Oregon Supreme Court 2012, 352 Or. 697)“…t provision constituted unlawful 15 discrimination under ORS 659A.030(1)(f)5 and Title VII of the Civil Right…”
- Meyer v. State (Court of Appeals of Oregon 2018, 292 Or. App. 647)“…the Lottery subjected Meyer to retaliation in violation of ORS 659A.030 because she reported Niswender's sexual…”
- Hernandez v. Catholic Health Initiatives (Court of Appeals of Oregon 2021, 311 Or. App. 70)“…d abetting her employer in unlawful employ- ment practices. ORS 659A.030(1)(g). Defendants moved to dismiss, con…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 659A.109Discrimination against individual for using procedures in ORS 659A.103 to 659A.145 prohibitedIn force
It is an unlawful employment practice for an employer to discriminate against an individual with respect to hire or tenure or any term or condition of employment because the individual has applied for benefits or invoked or used the procedures provided for in ORS 659A.103 to 659A.145 or has given testimony under the provisions of ORS 659A.103 to 659A.145. [Formerly 659.410; 2009 c.508 §5]
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at oregonlegislature.gov
Cited in 22 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Herbert v. Altimeter, Inc. (Court of Appeals of Oregon 2009, 230 Or. App. 715)“…rovided for in ORS 659A.100 to 659A.145[,]” in violation of ORS 659A.109. Defendant argues that it could not hav…”
- Chase v. Vernam (Court of Appeals of Oregon 2005, 199 Or. App. 129)“…in retaliation for pursuing a workers’ compensation claim. ORS 659A.109; ORS 659A.043; ORS 659A.885(1).…”
- Heiple v. Henderson (Court of Appeals of Oregon 2009, 229 Or. App. 693)“…ully terminated for exercising that right. See ORS 659A.109 (providing that it is an unlawful emplo…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 659A.183Denying family leave to eligible employee prohibited; retaliation prohibitedIn force
It is an unlawful practice for a covered employer to: (1) Deny family leave to which an eligible employee is entitled under ORS 659A.150 to 659A.186; or (2) Retaliate or in any way discriminate against an individual with respect to hire or tenure or any other term or condition of employment because the individual has inquired about the provisions of ORS 659A.150 to 659A.186, submitted a request for family leave or invoked any provision of ORS 659A.150 to 659A.186. [Formerly 659.492; 2007 c.777 §2]
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at oregonlegislature.gov
Cited in 23 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Yeager v. Providence Health System Oregon (Court of Appeals of Oregon 2004, 195 Or. App. 134)“…al of leave is an unlawful practice. See ORS 659A.183 (“A covered employer who denies family…”
- Hernandez v. Catholic Health Initiatives (Court of Appeals of Oregon 2021, 311 Or. App. 70)“…terfering with her protected medical leave, in violation of ORS 659A.183. Plaintiff additionally alleges that de…”
- Cullen v. Clean Water Services (Court of Appeals of Oregon 2025, 344 Or. App. 228)“…enied him the abil- ity to take OFLA leave, in violation of ORS 659A.183(1), and failed to provide reasonable ac…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Oregon Revised Statutes, Chapter 653: Minimum Wages; Employment Conditions; Minors
§ 653.060Discharging or discriminating against employee prohibitedIn forcecited in 2 of our articles
(1) An employer may not discharge or in any other manner discriminate against an employee because: (a) The employee has inquired about the provisions of ORS 653.010 to 653.261 or 653.265 or has reported a violation of or filed a complaint related to ORS 653.010 to 653.261 or 653.265. (b) The employee has caused to be instituted or is about to cause to be instituted any proceedings under or related to ORS 653.010 to 653.261 or 653.265. (c) The employee has testified or is about to testify in any such proceedings. (2) A violation of this section is an unlawful employment practice under ORS chapter 659A. A person unlawfully discriminated against under this section may file a complaint under ORS 659A.820 with the Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor and Industries.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at oregonlegislature.gov
Cited in 5 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2023
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Buero v. Amazon.com Services, Inc. (Oregon Supreme Court 2022, 370 Or. 502)“…ion of a State” from the definition of “employer”); compare ORS 653.060 (1967) (mak- ing it unlawful to “discha…”
- Justice v. Rockwell Collins, Inc. (District Court, D. Oregon 2015, 117 F. Supp. 3d 1119)“…for reporting unpaid overtime in violation of the FLSA and Or.Rev.Stat. § 653.060; (3) sexual harassment in violation of…”
- Krouse v. Ply Gem Pacific Windows Corp. (District Court, D. Oregon 2011, 803 F. Supp. 2d 1220)“…inst plaintiff after he brought wage claims in violation of ORS 653.060 and ORS 652.355. Compl. at 12. Section…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Oregon Minimum Wage 2026: $15.55 Standard, $16.80 Portland Metro
Oregon Revised Statutes, Chapter 652: Hours; Wages; Wage Claims; Records
§ 652.355Prohibition of discrimination because of wage claim or refusal to work additional hours; remedyIn force
(1) An employer may not discharge or in any other manner discriminate against an employee because: (a) The employee has made a wage claim or discussed, inquired about or consulted an attorney or agency about a wage claim; (b) The employee has caused to be instituted any proceedings under or related to ORS 652.310 to 652.414; (c) The employee has testified or is about to testify in any such proceedings; (d) The employee has inquired about the provisions of ORS 652.020 or has reported a violation of or filed a complaint related to ORS 652.020; (e) The employee has declined to consent to work more than 55 hours in any given workweek under ORS 652.020 or 653.265; or (f) The employee has declined to consent to work more than 55 hours per workweek in any given workweek during an undue hardship period under ORS 652.020 or 653.265. (2) A violation of this section is an unlawful employment practice under ORS chapter 659A. A person unlawfully discriminated against under this section may file a complaint under ORS 659A.820 with the Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor and Industries.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at oregonlegislature.gov
Cited in 24 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Brown v. American Property Management Corp. (Court of Appeals of Oregon 2000, 167 Or. App. 53)“…had terminated him for making a wage claim in violation of ORS 652.355, which provides that: “No employ…”
- Perri v. Certified Languages International, LLC (Court of Appeals of Oregon 2003, 187 Or. App. 76)“…laints concerning the minimum wage and overtime violations. ORS 652.355; 29 USC § 215 (a)(3) (2000). The trial…”
- Dinicola v. State (Court of Appeals of Oregon 2016, 280 Or. App. 488)“…rought this action against the state, alleging, pursuant to ORS 652.355, ORS 659A.230, ORS 659A.030, ORS 659A.2…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Oregon Revised Statutes, Chapter 443: Residential Care; Adult Foster Homes; Hospice Programs
§ 443.765Complaint procedure; retaliation prohibited; notice of rates and rules; liability for complaintsIn force
(1) Complaints against adult foster homes may be filed with the licensing agency by any person, whether or not a resident of the home. The licensing agency shall investigate complaints regarding adult foster homes and shall adopt by rule standards governing investigations pursuant to this section. (2) The licensing agency shall prepare a notice which must be posted in a conspicuous place in each adult foster home stating the telephone number of the agency and the procedure for making complaints. (3) The licensing agency shall maintain a file of all complaints and the action taken on the complaint, indexed by the name of the owner or operator. When the licensing agency concludes the investigation of a complaint, the agency shall clearly designate the outcome of the complaint investigation in the complaint file. The filed complaint forms shall protect the privacy of the complainant, the resident and the witnesses. (4) Any person has a right to inspect and photocopy the complaint files maintained by the licensing agency.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at oregonlegislature.gov
Oregon Revised Statutes, Chapter 430: Mental and Behavioral Health Treatment; Developmental Disabilities
§ 430.755Retaliation prohibited; liability for retaliationIn force
(1) A facility, community program or person shall not retaliate against any person who reports in good faith suspected abuse or against the allegedly abused adult with respect to any report. (2) Any facility, community program or person that retaliates against any person because of a report of suspected abuse shall be liable in a private action to that person for actual damages and, in addition, a penalty up to $1,000, notwithstanding any other remedy provided by law. (3)(a) Any adverse action is evidence of retaliation if taken within 90 days of a report. (b) For purposes of this subsection, “adverse action” means any action taken by a facility, community program or person involved in a report against the person making the report or against the adult with respect to whom the report was made because of the report, and includes but is not limited to: (A) Discharge or transfer from the facility, except for clinical reasons; (B) Discharge from or termination of employment; (C) Demotion or reduction in remuneration for services; or (D) Restriction or prohibition of access to the facility or its residents.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at oregonlegislature.gov
Oregon Revised Statutes, Chapter 441: Health Care Facilities
§ 441.181Retaliation prohibitedIn force
(1) A hospital may not take retaliatory action against a nursing staff because the nursing staff: (a) Discloses or intends to disclose to a manager, a private accreditation organization or a public body an activity, policy or practice of the hospital or of a hospital that the nursing staff reasonably believes is in violation of law or a rule or is a violation of professional standards of practice that the nursing staff reasonably believes poses a risk to the health, safety or welfare of a patient or the public; (b) Provides information to or testifies before a private accreditation organization or a public body conducting an investigation, hearing or inquiry into an alleged violation of law or rule or into an activity, policy or practice that may be in violation of professional standards of practice by a hospital that the nursing staff reasonably believes poses a risk to the health, safety or welfare of a patient or the public; (c) Objects to or refuses to participate in any activity, policy or practice of a hospital that the nursing staff reasonably believes is in violation of law or rule or is a violation of professional standards of practice that the nursing…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at oregonlegislature.gov
Cited in 2 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2024
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Boyd v. Legacy Health (Court of Appeals of Oregon 2022, 318 Or. App. 87)“…ort of violation of law); (2) statutory retali- ation under ORS 441.181 (prohibiting retaliatory action against…”
- Castellanos v. Kaiser Foundation Health Plan of the Northwest (District Court, D. Oregon 2024)“…retaliation under ORS § 441.181 (“Claim 3”). Courts analyze retali…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Oregon Revised Statutes, Chapter 475A: Psilocybin Regulation
§ 475A.489Whistleblower protection for employeesIn force
(1) It is an unlawful employment practice for a licensee to discharge, demote, suspend or in any manner discriminate or retaliate against an employee of the licensee with regard to promotion, compensation or other terms, conditions or privileges of employment on the basis that the employee has in good faith reported information to the Oregon Health Authority that the employee believes is evidence of a violation of ORS 475A.210 to 475A.722 or a rule adopted under ORS 475A.210 to 475A.722. (2) This section is subject to enforcement under ORS chapter 659A. [2021 c.1 §68] (Psilocybin Control and Regulation Fund)
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at oregonlegislature.gov
Oregon Revised Statutes, Chapter 475C: Cannabis Regulation
§ 475C.285Whistleblower protection for employeesIn force
(1) It is an unlawful employment practice for a licensee to discharge, demote, suspend or in any manner discriminate or retaliate against an employee of the licensee with regard to promotion, compensation or other terms, conditions or privileges of employment on the basis that the employee has in good faith reported information to the Oregon Liquor and Cannabis Commission that the employee believes is evidence of a violation of ORS 475C.005 to 475C.525 or 475C.540 to 475C.586 or a rule adopted under ORS 475C.005 to 475C.525 or 475C.540 to 475C.586. (2) This section is subject to enforcement under ORS chapter 659A. [Formerly 475B.281; 2023 c.519 §19]
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at oregonlegislature.gov
Explore the law
This article also draws on these acts and chapters (opening at their first section): Oregon Revised Statutes, Chapter 659A: Unlawful Discrimination in Employment, Public Accommodations and Real Property Transactions; Administrative and Civil Enforcement § 659A.001 (Definitions)
Related law for further reading — not part of this article’s citations.
Search our full record of US law — 2.1 million sections, every state + federal →
Sources and References
- Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries - Whistleblowing Protections(oregon.gov).gov
- ORS Chapter 659A - Unlawful Discrimination in Employment (Full Text)(oregonlegislature.gov).gov
- BOLI Whistleblower Protections: Uniform Standards and Procedures Manual(oregon.gov).gov
- ORS 654.062 - Oregon Safe Employment Act(oregonlegislature.gov).gov
- Oregon OSHA - Whistleblower Investigations(osha.oregon.gov).gov
- ORS 441.181-441.186 - Hospital Nursing Staff Whistleblower Protections(oregonlegislature.gov).gov
- ORS 430.755 - Assisted Living Facility Protections(oregonlegislature.gov).gov
- ORS 443.765 - Adult Foster Home Employee Protections(oregonlegislature.gov).gov
- ORS 653.060 - Minimum Wage and Overtime Protections(oregonlegislature.gov).gov
- ORS 652.355 - Wage Claim Retaliation Protections(oregonlegislature.gov).gov
- Burley v. Clackamas County, 298 Or App 462 (2019) - ORS 659A.199 applies to public employers(courtlistener.com)
- ORS 475C.285 - Whistleblower Protection for Cannabis Licensee Employees(oregonlegislature.gov)
- ORS 475A.489 - Whistleblower Protection for Psilocybin Licensee Employees(oregonlegislature.gov)
Paid attorney referral. RecordingLaw may receive compensation when you use an attorney-help link. RecordingLaw is not a law firm. Submitting a request does not guarantee that an attorney will accept your case and does not create an attorney-client relationship.