Wrongful Discharge

Also found in: Financial.

Wrongful Discharge

An at-will employee's Cause of Action against his former employer, alleging that his discharge was in violation of state or federal antidiscrimination statutes, public policy, an implied contract, or an implied Covenant of Good Faith and fair dealing.

At Common Law, an employment contract of indefinite duration can be terminated by either party at any time for any reason. The United States is the only major industrial power that maintains a general employment-at-will rule. Since the 1950s, however, many courts have allowed discharged at-will employees to bring suits alleging wrongful discharge from employment.

An at-will employee may allege that her discharge is based on illegal discrimination. The Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C.A. § 2000e et seq., contains broad prohibitions against discrimination in employment based on race, color, religion, national origin, or sex. Discrimination against persons forty years old and over is banned by the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 29 U.S.C.A. § 621 et seq. (1967). In addition, an at-will employee may use state antidiscrimination statutes to contest a discharge.

A majority of states allow an at-will employee to proceed with a wrongful discharge action that is based on public policy. This means that an employer cannot legally discharge an employee if the employee refused the employer's request to violate a specific federal or state statute, or a professional code of ethics. In addition, it is against public policy to discharge an employee who exercises a statutory right, such as the right to apply for worker's compensation benefits for an on-the-job injury. An employee is also protected if his Whistleblowing activity or other conduct exposing the employer's wrongdoing resulted in a retaliatory discharge.

Employees may sue for wrongful discharge in almost half of the states on the basis of an express or implied promise by the employer, which constitutes a unilateral contract. In a unilateral contract, one party makes a promise and receives performance from the other party. Typically, this type of wrongful discharge action will be based on a statement by the employer that expressly or implicitly promises employees a degree of job security. Ordinarily, such statements are found in employee handbooks or in policy statements given to employees when they are hired.

Some courts have interpreted such statements as unilateral contracts in which the employer promises not to discharge the employees except for Just Cause and in accordance with certain procedures. The difficulty with suits based on the employer's promise from the employee's perspective is that the employer may eliminate the possibility of a suit by issuing a policy statement that expressly disclaims any right to continuing employment.

Some at-will employees have based their suits on an implied covenant (promise) of good faith and fair dealing. The discharged employee typically contends that the employer has indicated in various ways that the employee has job security and will be treated fairly. For example, long-time employees who have consistently received favorable evaluations might claim that their length of service and positive performance reviews were signs that their jobs would be secure as long as they performed satisfactorily. However, few jurisdictions have recognized any good-faith-and-fair-dealing exceptions to the employment at-will practice.

Further readings

Handling Wrongful Termination Claims. 2001. New York: Practising Law Institute.

Simmons, Richard J. 1994. Wrongful Discharge and Employment Practices Manual. 2d ed. Van Nuys, Calif.: Castle Publications.

Wrongful Termination Claims. 1997–2000. New York: Practising Law Institute.


Employment Law.

West's Encyclopedia of American Law, edition 2. Copyright 2008 The Gale Group, Inc. All rights reserved.
References in periodicals archive ?
Interestingly, the defendant corporation was a legal book and research materials publisher--which might explain why its management practices conformed well with existing legal requirements for a successful defense to wrongful discharge allegations.
Today, disgruntled employees are more likely to sue their employers, and they do so using a host of legal theories, including discrimination, wrongful discharge, whistleblower retaliation, and a variety of innovative employment-related torts.
Tarbell is seeking wrongful discharge damages totaling about $437,300, including lost salary, "extreme emotional distress," moving costs and punitive damages.
Unless your policy language is clear, conspicuous and unalterable, it may be useless in defending a wrongful discharge claim.
Actually, the original bill (AB 3017) introduced in the California Assembly on February 14, 1984, was based on recommendations contained in a report by the State Bar Ad Hoc Committee on Termination-at-Will and Wrongful Discharge.(2) Shortly thereafter, amendments were introduced in response to employer concerns, significantly altering the original bill.(3) Professor William B.
The Court unanimously reversed a $285,000 wrongful discharge verdict awarded to three former employees who had been fired for alleged drug-related activities.
The lawsuit alleges wrongful discharge and defamation and seeks more than $1 million in damages on each count.
Curtis filed suit in Clay County Circuit Court in October 2017 claiming a single count of wrongful discharge in violation of public policy.
A South Carolina deputy who was fired after pulling a high school student from her desk and dragging her across the floor sued his former employer for wrongful discharge, arguing that the firing violated public policy.
However, the Plaintiffs' service records had, until that point, been essentially unblemished.<br />The Plaintiffs sued the Town, Cook, and Bralley for First Amendment retaliation and wrongful discharge under state law.
The $387 million Nutmeg State Financial Credit Union fired back Tuesday after two former executives filed wrongful discharge and defamation civil lawsuit.
Her experience includes providing critical employment solutions across a broad spectrum of employment issues, including Title VII, FMLA, ADA, ADEA, FLSA, ERISA, affirmative action and OFCCP compliance, state law wrongful discharge and employment tort claims, restrictive covenants, unemployment benefits, workers' compensation, regulatory compliance and human resources.