Jurisdiction:
Area of Law:
Question:
Selected Answer:
Luckily for you, Oregon
Submitted by DakotaLegal on
All Comments
Luckily for you, Oregon
Submitted by DakotaLegal on
Luckily for you, Oregon actually has some the of the country’s most progressive rules and laws for protecting employees from wrongful discharge. Oregon also has a “common law” rule against wrongful discharge. Having said that, it’s not easy to prove wrongful discharge without three things: (1) a fairly detailed history of discrimination or unlawful acts that is against a law, public policy, or contract, (2) specific evidence of a hostile work place, or (3) direct witness testimony.
To some extent, this means getting a lawyer who knows the in’s and out’s of Oregon’s laws. You should try to get a free consultation, with an attorney who specializes in wrongful worker discharge cases. Try the Oregon Bar Association’s referral system… http://www.osbar.org/public/ris/ris.html. To a great extent, your ability to find a lawyer who is willing to take the case strictly on a contingency basis (you only pay if they win) will measure whether you have the facts supporting a claim of wrongful discharge. You may also be eligible for sliding-fee legal help: http://www.law help.org /program/694/index.cfm. If you don’t want to take that step of a possible law suit, then try the Oregon division that enforces workplace “fairness,” Oregon’s BOLI… http://www.workplace fairness.org/agencies_OR.
- The Problem: Oregon Is An At-Will Employment State
An employer in an at-will state (that’s 49 of 50 states) does not usually have to give specific reasons for firing someone. Oregon’s common law rule is that employment at-will can be terminated, by either party, at any time, and for any reason. 12 ALR4th 544 (1982). For your case to qualify as an exception to at-will rules, Oregon courts have said the facts “must be exceptional.” Your being discharged must be against a clear mandate of public policy, such as anti-discrimination laws. Courts have also noted that society may favor “honesty in business,” BUT this is not enough to prevent employment at-will.
Here’s an Oregon case, describing the law about wrongful discharge. The case is interesting since the employee actually won in the trial, but lost on appeal: http://www.leagle.com/xmlResult.aspx?page =4&xmldoc =1983888670 P2d218_1867.xml&docbase=CSLWAR1-1950-1985&SizeDisp=7. The appeals court there found the employee had not proven an exception to the general rule allowing at-will termination should apply. The case also has something important in common with your situation, since there were serious allegations about the manager’s honesty regarding the reason for the employee’s discharge.
- Exceptions In Oregon’s At-Will Rule
So it is hard to get over the at-will employment rule. Having said that, there might be specific facts, setting your situation outside the at-will rules. The four major common law exceptions in Oregon are: (1) a public policy, (2) an implied or express contract, (3) a law or statute and (4) an implied covenant of good faith. Here’s a useful chart showing Oregon’s rules: http://www.ncsl.org/issues-research/labor/at-will-employment-overview.aspx.
Here are two examples of things to look for in your Employee Handbook (I assume you had one): they are common examples of language used to allow at-will discharge.
Example 1: “We reserve the right to employ at will. This means that employment can be terminated, with or without cause, and with or without notice, at any time, at the option of the company or at the option of the employee.”
Example 2: “These policies are not to be construed as a contract of employment. We expressly reserve the right to change, add to, or delete policies at any time. Changes will be effective on dates determined by the company, and you may not rely on policies that have been superseded. No supervisor or manager other than our CEO has authority to alter the policies, and all such changes must be in writing.”
Not having these terms in your Handbook can help your case for wrongful discharge.
- …And, About Taking Unemployment
Your boss had said they “wouldn’t oppose” your filing for unemployment. Actually, this kind of promise should always raise a red flag for a fired employee. The reason this seemingly “kind” offer is suspicious is because the odds are that you would have gotten unemployment even if they tried to fight it.
Instead of being a good thing, being encouraged by an ex-employer to accept unemployment compensation can have the result of undercutting your ability to file a private law suit against the employer. Look at page 9 of this document for some insights: http://www.filinginoregon.com/pages/forms/business/guides/employer_guide.pdf.
Luckily for you, Oregon actually has some the of the country’s most progressive rules and laws for protecting employees from wrongful discharge. Oregon also has a “common law” rule against wrongful discharge. Having said that, it’s not easy to prove wrongful discharge without three things: (1) a fairly detailed history of discrimination or unlawful acts that is against a law, public policy, or contract, (2) specific evidence of a hostile work place, or (3) direct witness testimony.
To some extent, this means getting a lawyer who knows the in’s and out’s of Oregon’s laws. You should try to get a free consultation, with an attorney who specializes in wrongful worker discharge cases. Try the Oregon Bar Association’s referral system… http://www.osbar.org/public/ris/ris.html. To a great extent, your ability to find a lawyer who is willing to take the case strictly on a contingency basis (you only pay if they win) will measure whether you have the facts supporting a claim of wrongful discharge. You may also be eligible for sliding-fee legal help: http://www.law help.org /program/694/index.cfm. If you don’t want to take that step of a possible law suit, then try the Oregon division that enforces workplace “fairness,” Oregon’s BOLI… http://www.workplace fairness.org/agencies_OR.
An employer in an at-will state (that’s 49 of 50 states) does not usually have to give specific reasons for firing someone. Oregon’s common law rule is that employment at-will can be terminated, by either party, at any time, and for any reason. 12 ALR4th 544 (1982). For your case to qualify as an exception to at-will rules, Oregon courts have said the facts “must be exceptional.” Your being discharged must be against a clear mandate of public policy, such as anti-discrimination laws. Courts have also noted that society may favor “honesty in business,” BUT this is not enough to prevent employment at-will.
Here’s an Oregon case, describing the law about wrongful discharge. The case is interesting since the employee actually won in the trial, but lost on appeal: http://www.leagle.com/xmlResult.aspx?page =4&xmldoc =1983888670 P2d218_1867.xml&docbase=CSLWAR1-1950-1985&SizeDisp=7. The appeals court there found the employee had not proven an exception to the general rule allowing at-will termination should apply. The case also has something important in common with your situation, since there were serious allegations about the manager’s honesty regarding the reason for the employee’s discharge.
So it is hard to get over the at-will employment rule. Having said that, there might be specific facts, setting your situation outside the at-will rules. The four major common law exceptions in Oregon are: (1) a public policy, (2) an implied or express contract, (3) a law or statute and (4) an implied covenant of good faith. Here’s a useful chart showing Oregon’s rules: http://www.ncsl.org/issues-research/labor/at-will-employment-overview.aspx.
Here are two examples of things to look for in your Employee Handbook (I assume you had one): they are common examples of language used to allow at-will discharge.
Example 1: “We reserve the right to employ at will. This means that employment can be terminated, with or without cause, and with or without notice, at any time, at the option of the company or at the option of the employee.”
Example 2: “These policies are not to be construed as a contract of employment. We expressly reserve the right to change, add to, or delete policies at any time. Changes will be effective on dates determined by the company, and you may not rely on policies that have been superseded. No supervisor or manager other than our CEO has authority to alter the policies, and all such changes must be in writing.”
Not having these terms in your Handbook can help your case for wrongful discharge.
Your boss had said they “wouldn’t oppose” your filing for unemployment. Actually, this kind of promise should always raise a red flag for a fired employee. The reason this seemingly “kind” offer is suspicious is because the odds are that you would have gotten unemployment even if they tried to fight it.
Instead of being a good thing, being encouraged by an ex-employer to accept unemployment compensation can have the result of undercutting your ability to file a private law suit against the employer. Look at page 9 of this document for some insights: http://www.filinginoregon.com/pages/forms/business/guides/employer_guide.pdf.