Wrongful Termination in Utah - terminations that implicate a clear and substantial public policy

 

Utah, like other states, follows the doctrine of at-will employment. Under this doctrine, there is a presumption that all employment relationships are terminable at-will by any party. This development of this doctrine arose from ideas related to freedom of contract and laissez-faire economic principles that were judicially created over time to create a default rule for employment relationships. Stated differently, an at-will employment relationship means that an employer or employee may  terminate an employee the relationship at any time, with or without notice, and with or without cause as long as such termination is not for an unlawful reason.

The at-will employment rule is a presumption that may be overcome in several ways, including, for example, through a contract with a specific term (i.e., one year) or through agreements that limit the situations in which an employee may be terminated (i.e., termination for "cause"). Of course, simply because an employee is not employed at-will does not leave an employee without legal protections. Employees are protected by numerous laws that prohibit terminations for various reasons deemed to be unlawful, whether the employee is an at-will employee or otherwise (i.e., discrimination, harassment, retaliation). One exception to the at-will employment rule under Utah law is when an employee is terminated by an employer in violation of a clear and substantial public policy.

Understanding what qualifies as a “clear and substantial public policy” is key to evaluating claims of wrongful termination under Utah law. Under Utah law, to assert a claim of wrongful termination in violation of public policy, Utah courts require that an employee show that he or she was discharged, the discharge implicated a clear and substantial public policy (authoritative sources of Utah or other laws like statutes, common law and constitutional protections), the employee’s conduct brought the policy into play, and a connection between the protected conduct and the discharge or termination exists.

Only substantial public policies will suffice to provide a basis for this exception. Such policies must be defined in authoritative sources, such as legislative enactments, constitutional provisions, or judicial decisions and these policies must affect the public generally, not merely the private interests of the parties. For example, the Utah Supreme Court has held that the right to self-defense is such a policy. Another example is an employee exercising his or her rights to file a workers’ compensation claim.

Utah law has recognized four non-exclusive types of conduct that can give rise to a wrongful termination claim. First, an employee that refuses to commit an illegal or wrongful act and is terminated for such refusal has a wrongful termination claim. Second, an employee who performs a public obligation, like jury duty, and is terminated because of that obligation has a wrongful termination claim. Third, an employee who exercises a legal right or privilege, such as filing a workers’ compensation claim, has a wrongful termination claim. Fourth, an employee who is terminated for reporting an employer’s criminal activity to a public authority also has a wrongful termination claim. Utah law is clear that internal reporting to an employer can give rise to a wrongful termination claim as well. And these four broad categories of claims are not exhaustive.

Utah employers should be cautious about terminating employees who raise safety concerns, report regulatory violations, or refuse to participate in certain protected conduct. Even internal complaints can trigger wrongful termination liability if the complaints relate to substantial public policies. Workers who face retaliation for reporting hazards, resisting unsafe practices, exercising legal rights or refusing to commit crimes may have grounds for a wrongful termination claim—especially when such conduct implicates statutory protections, judicial decisions or constitutional protections.

For employees who have been terminated and are dealing with a potential wrongful termination issue, it is critical to assess whether your situation involves one of these recognized public policy exceptions. In addition, numerous state and federal laws also provide protections for whistleblowers or other terminations involving unlawful activities. Many of these statutes have short statute of limitations periods - as short as 30 days - so it's important to evaluate your case as soon as possible. An employment lawyer can help you assess whether you have a case and the time limitations associated with any claim you may have.

For more information, you can contact one of the Utah employment lawyers at Stavros Law by telephone at (801) 758-7604, or by email at scheduling@stavroslaw.com, or reach out to us on our website at www.stavroslaw.com.