Courts in virtually every state have imposed restrictions on an employer’s right to fire. These public policy limitations arise when courts perceive that a discharge is morally or socially wrong, even if there is no statutory authority behind the decision.
In the following situations, employers were found to have illegally violated employee rights protected by public policy when they took retaliatory action against employees who:
Fired employees have relied on the public policy limitation in winning wrongful discharge lawsuits in various situations. Perhaps most common is the claim that a public policy embodied in a federal or state law was violated when an employee was fired for attempting to exercise a statutory right, such as a right to work in a smoke-free area. Or, a firing may involve public policy when it is based on an employee’s opposition to illegal conduct. In essence, if a firing is inconsistent with any stated federal or state policy or interest, the fired employee has a potential claim.
Emotional distress claims. A fired employee will frequently accompany a public policy claim with an assertion that the employer’s conduct was so improper as to cause the employee mental and emotional anguish. The addition of the emotional distress claim creates the possibility that you may be held liable for monetary damages not only for lost wages and benefits associated with the wrongful discharge, but also for any physical or emotional toll resulting from the discharge that can be translated into money. In addition, if your conduct is found to be particularly offensive, the employee may be entitled to receive punitive damages.
Copyright 2006, CCH INCORPORATED. All Rights Reserved.