“Wrongful termination” is a catch-all term, and as discussed in a recent post an imperfect one. In essence, wrongful termination occurs when a firing violates public policy or a statute in some way that creates at least a possible damage remedy for the fired worker.
Maryland law has a catch-all category of firings in defiance of Maryland public policy that give rise to claims for damages for wrongful termination/abusive discharge, under Adler v. American Standard and cases relying on Adler. I prefer to refer to these claims as “Adler claims” to avoid confusion.
Many other statute prohibit retaliation – termination or sometimes retaliation short of termination – against workers who exercise a right or object to an illegal practice. In some of those cases, the Adler doctrine might not apply because it is superfluous; the statute may trump the “common law” Adler claim. Sometimes Adler can provide a remedy against a firing that is illegal under a statute, but for which no remedy can be obtained otherwise; an example might be a discriminatory firing that lies outside the power of the EEOC or the Maryland Office of Civil Rights due to the small size of the employer. Firings on the basis of race are illegal, even if the employer is too small to fall within the 15-employee minimum for a statutory civil remedy.
Examples of employment statutes that have anti-retaliation provisions are the Maryland and federal age and hour laws, the Workers Compensation Law, the Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act (even for workers who haven’t themselves claimed or suffered discrimination) and many others. Workers who get fired for objecting to illegal practices or for exercising a right protected in a clearly articulated way may have a statutory remedy and/or an Adler remedy.
In practice, what are examples of potentially good wrongful termination cases? Here are a few examples of cases that MIGHT have merit.
Worker fired for reporting illegal activity to the government or, sometimes, threatening to do so or reporting it within the company.
Worker fired for refusing to participate in a crime, such as some forms of commercial fraud, tax fraud, mail fraud or wire fraud, etc.
Worker fired for objecting to violations of the minimum wage laws, the overtime laws, to some extent the wage payment and collection laws.
Worker who may not necessarily have suffered sexual harassment or discrimination, but fired for complaining within the employing unit or outside of it of discrimination or harassment.
Worker fired for reporting a safety concern for workers or consumers.
Worker fired for refusing unlawfully to discriminate or for urging others to cease discriminatory practices.
Worker fired for inquiring about disability or family medical leave accommodations, regardless of whether the worker was disabled/entitled to family medical leave.
Worker fired for refusing to provide Facebook information – his/her own or a coworker’s – to an employer in defiance of Maryland’s law prohibiting such data collection.
Worker fired for discussing conditions of work or of pay with co-workers in suspect violation of the National Labor Relations Act (see this post for additional information.)
I am NOT stating that these cases are or would be successful, only that they are examples of potentially viable wrongful termination claims that merit additional technical review.
