Abstract
Since I majored in history in college, I thought it makes sense to start with a history lesson.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Wagenseller v. Scottsdale Memorial Hosp., 710 P. 2d 1025, 1030 (Ariz. 1985), superseded by statute as stated in Fallar v. Compuware Corp., 202 F. Supp. 2d 1067 (D. Ariz. 2002) (citing Murg & scharman), Employment at Will: Do the Exceptions Overwhelm the Rule?, 23 B.C.L.Rev. 329, 332 (1982).
Id.
Id. (quoting 1 W. Blackstone, Commentaries).
Id. (citing Murg & scharman, supra, at 332).
Id. (citing Murg & scharman, supra, at 334).
Id.
Id. (quoting H.G). Wood, Law of Master and Servant § 134 at 273 (1877).
See, e.g., Toussaint v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield, 292 N.W.2d 880, 886–87 & nn. 13-14 (mich. 1980).
Wagenseller, 710 p. 2d at 1030.
Id. at 1031. (quoting Blades), Employment at Will v. Individual Freedom: On Limiting the Abusive Exercise of Employer Power, 67 Colum.L.Rev. 1404, 1405 (1967).
Montana is the lone wolf. in 1987, the Montana legislature passed the Wrongful Discharge from Employment Act (WDEA). Under the WDEA, a discharge is wrongful only if “it was in retaliation for the employee’s refusal to violate public policy or for reporting a violation of public policy; the discharge was not for good cause and the employee had completed the employer’s probationary period of employment; or the employer violated the express provisions of its own written personnel policy.” Mont. Code. Ann. § 39-2-904 (2008). Thus, in Montana, an employer needs “good cause” to support a termination decision.
42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-2000e-17.
42U.S.C.§2000e(k).
29 U.S.C. §§621-634.
42 U.S.C. §§ 12101-12213.
29U.S.C.§206(d).
Pub.L.110-233..
38 U.S.C. §§ 4301-4335.
29 U.S.C. §§ 2601-2654.
29 U.S.C. §§201-217,255.
29 U.S.C. §§301-1441.
29 U.S.C. §§651-678.
29 U.S.C. §§ 151-169.
15 U.S.C.§§ 1681-1681x.
29U.S.C.§§2001-2009.
29U.S.C. §§ 2101-2109.
An implied contract is one created out of the conduct of the parties and from a written agreement. Courts enforce these implied contracts in circumstances in which it is reasonable to assume that a contract existed as the result of a tacit understanding between the parties. The 13 states that do not recognize this implied contract exception are Delaware, Florida, Georgia, indiana, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Missouri, Montana, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Texas, and Virginia.
The seven states that do not recognize this public policy exception are Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Maine, Nebraska, New York, and Rhode Island.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Jonathan T. Hyman
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hyman, J.T. (2012). The Employer Bill of Rights. In: The Employer Bill of Rights. Apress, Berkeley, CA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4302-4552-0_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4302-4552-0_1
Publisher Name: Apress, Berkeley, CA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4302-4551-3
Online ISBN: 978-1-4302-4552-0
eBook Packages: Business and EconomicsBusiness and Management (R0)Apress Access Books