Appellate Court Clarifies Employment Tort of Retaliatory Discharge
Posted on August 15, 2011 by Eugene Hollander
, retaliatory discharge
On July 21, 2011, the Illinois Appellate Court issued an opinion in the case of Michael v. Precision Alliance Group
, which clarifies the tort of retaliatory discharge
. Under common law, the State of Illinois prohibits an employer for retaliating against an employee and terminating their employment if they engage in protected activity. Generally, the courts have given a narrow view to the claim. The classic case involves an employee who gets injured on the job and files a claim against his employer for worker's compensation. If the employer terminates the employee for that reason, it is an illegal motive, and the employee has a civil action against the employer. In the Michael
case, three employees were employed by Precision's plant in downstate Nashville. The company is in the agricultural supply business. It packages soybean seeds in 50 pound and 2,000 pound bags for commercial sale. The employees observed that the company was shipping underweight bags. The three plaintiffs recorded information about the underweight bags and forwarded the information to another individual, Dudley, who formerly worked for the company. Dudley, in turn, passed the information to the state. In February, 2003, the Department of Agriculture began investigating the company. The agency issued a stop-sale order against the company on February 20, 2003. The trial court threw the case out, reasoning that the plaintiffs did not report the activity to the state. The appellate court reversed, reasoning that the plaintiffs intended that the information be conveyed to the state. The court also held that mislabeling weight under state law violated public policy, and thus, the plaintiffs' retaliatory discharge claim was actionable.