Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1

    Default Is An Employee's Refusal To Break Law Protected

    Please assume Ohio.

    Clearly, it is repeated on here many places that wrongful termination only applies to discrimination protected by law (such as sex, race and age), but I was wondering, under the doctrine of at-will employment, can your boss safely fire you for not breaking the law, a local/state/federal regulation or some other government mandated policy?

    For example, say your boss told you he needed to get downtown quick. You got in the company car, and your boss told you to speed. You refused. Your boss missed his meeting, lost a big account and fired you the next day and even gave you a termination letter, referring to your "failure" the day before to deliver him to his meeting on time as the reason you were fired. Do you have a good chance of winning a wrongful termination suit?

    If there is any protection for such a termination, how deep does that protection go? In other words, if federal law trumps the at-will doctrine
    what about a county ordinance, what about an order from the company president to do something that would make you personally liable to a third party in a civil matter?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Austin, Texas
    Posts
    65

    Default Re: Is Refusal To Break Law Protected?

    Instead of hypotheticals, post what actually happened and then people can give you advice that is appropriate for your situation.

  3. #3
    panther10758 Guest

    Default Re: Is Refusal To Break Law Protected?

    Just leave out name of company, your name maybe even city

  4. #4

    Default Re: Is An Employee's Refusal To Break Law Protected

    There are no facts. I was just wondering. Sorry if I cluttered up the forum by just asking a general question out of my own curiosity.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    3,835

    Default Re: Is An Employee's Refusal To Break Law Protected

    Quote Quoting jvending980
    View Post
    Please assume Ohio.

    Clearly, it is repeated on here many places that wrongful termination only applies to discrimination protected by law (such as sex, race and age), but I was wondering, under the doctrine of at-will employment, can your boss safely fire you for not breaking the law, a local/state/federal regulation or some other government mandated policy?

    For example, say your boss told you he needed to get downtown quick. You got in the company car, and your boss told you to speed. You refused. Your boss missed his meeting, lost a big account and fired you the next day and even gave you a termination letter, referring to your "failure" the day before to deliver him to his meeting on time as the reason you were fired. Do you have a good chance of winning a wrongful termination suit?

    If there is any protection for such a termination, how deep does that protection go? In other words, if federal law trumps the at-will doctrine
    what about a county ordinance, what about an order from the company president to do something that would make you personally liable to a third party in a civil matter?

    You say you live in Ohio? They DO recognize a public policy exception, yes, as many states do. Some research keying in selected terms hit this case. See par. 7 and on, the Greeley case. Par. 8 discusses other PP exceptions in addition to Ohio law, such as the US constitution.There is NO federal law dealing with at will employment, it is an individual state's right to adopt or abrogate at will.


    The web site of the OSC, I checked, does not archive opinions before 1992 which Greeley is 1990.

    Speeding is against the public policy of any state. If indeed you were terminated for refusing to break the law, no question in your mind, consult an employment law attorney for a case evaluation. Greeley may or may not apply. Don't expect your employer to admit it though IF a possible lawsuit is filed.


    http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/ne...-ohio-4921.pdf

    Go to a university/college law school law library and ask where you can find this citation (and any other listed) to read first hand.

    Or maybe you can pull up Greeley online. I could not find the WHOLE opinion.

    Greeley v. Miami Valley Maintenance Contrs.,
    Inc. (1990), 49 Ohio St.3d 228, 551 N.E.2d 981


    Ohio St., means it was an Ohio Supreme court decision, NOT an Appellate one, 3rd edition, volume 49, page 228.

    N.E. stands for North Eastern reporter, 2nd series volume 551, page 981. The case can be found in either series above. It is a series of law volume cases, such as S.E. would be South Eastern reporter. P. would be Pacific reporter.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Lucidity
    Posts
    10

    Default Re: Is An Employee's Refusal To Break Law Protected

    What if a frog had wings?

  7. #7

    Default Re: Is An Employee's Refusal To Break Law Protected

    Thank you very much, BOR, for the informed response.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    3,835

    Default Re: Is An Employee's Refusal To Break Law Protected

    Quote Quoting jvending980
    View Post
    Thank you very much, BOR, for the informed response.


    You are most welcome.

    1. Sponsored Links
       

Similar Threads

  1. How Can I Help My Children Be Protected
    By 594594 in forum Child Custody, Support and Visitation
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-09-2010, 09:35 PM
  2. Defamation: Are Personal Emails Protected?
    By mccluredj in forum Defamation, Slander And Libel
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-04-2008, 07:17 AM
  3. Truck Driver's Refusal To Break DOT Regulations
    By superman2112ms in forum Employment and Labor
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 05-28-2008, 08:29 AM
  4. Patents: Not patented and still protected?
    By Atomical in forum Intellectual Property
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-21-2006, 01:56 PM
  5. Temporary Protected Status
    By samuel_01 in forum Immigration Issues
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-30-2006, 07:32 AM
 
 
Sponsored Links

Legal Help, Information and Resources