Employment Law Midterm The U S Court System US Supreme Court writ of certiorari New Jersey Supreme Court writ of certification Federal Appeals Court State Appeals Court State Trial Court juries Federal Trial Court juries jurors only determine issues of fact 1 There are NO juries at the Appeal Courts or Supreme Courts 2 You have a choice whether or not have a jury 3 Appellate courts have an odd number of judges 4 Whatever the Supreme Court decides has to be adopted by the State Supreme Courts 5 You have to go through the whole state side before filing out the writ of habeas corpus and get to the federal side a Only when a federal law is broken can you skip over the line between the State Supreme Court and the U S Supreme Court Federal constitution is the floor the minimum base Can t go below it States must do at Factors of Employment Law both state and federal for all least that 1 Statutes 2 Administrative regulations 3 Federal state constitutions EEOC Equal Employment Opportunity Commission an employee and when partners qualify as employees 6 key factors guidelines on the issue of who is 1 Whether the organization can hire or fire the individual or set the rules and regulations of the individual s work 2 Whether and to what extent the organization supervises the individual s work 3 Whether the individual reports to someone higher in the organization 4 Whether and to what extent the individual is able to influence the organization 5 Whether the parties intended that the individual be an employee as expressed in written agreements or contracts 6 Whether the individual shares in the profits losses and liabilities of the organization Common Law that people followed judge made law back when there were no statutes they were socially accepted norms 1 Ex duty of safe operation driving 2 contract law is born out of common law 3 Based on duties Public Sector Private Sector Government employees teachers most small businesses law firms everyone else Week 2 Employment at Will Just Cause the Contract Exception Under the employment at will doctrine employers are free to terminate the employment relationship for good cause or for no cause or even for bad cause without thereby being guilty of an unlawful act In 1935 Congress enacted the National Labor Relations Act providing employees the right to form labor unions and to bargain collectively and prohibiting employers from firing employees for exercising their rights under the statute All these legislative efforts limit the ability of employers to terminate the employment relationship by exposing the employer to liability if the decision to terminate the employee is statutorily prohibited Starting in 1959 courts in most states began to use fairly traditional common law principles to limit the ability of employers to terminate employees at will Common law based job security protections 1 Contract based protections where employees challenge their firings on the grounds that the employer has breached an express or implied promise 2 Tort based protections in which employees have argued that the discharge of an employee is contrary to public policy The at will doctrine has been commonly referred to as a default rule Contractual job security protections can arise in situations where 1 The employer promises not to terminate the employment relationship expect for good cause 2 The employer promises to hire the employer for a specific definite period of time Arguments in cases where employees claim to operate under a just cause contract Just cause provisions are enforced via the grievance arbitration process 1 Arguments regarding the specificity of the language 2 Arguments regarding the lack of consideration 3 Arguments regarding the statute of frauds If the contract extends more than a year it has to be in writing in order to be enforceable When entering a specific duration contract the parties must have intended the employee to provide honest faithful and loyal service in accordance with his her ability Implied contracts may arise from 1 Communications 2 Oral statements 3 Written memorandum handbooks and manuals 4 Parties behaviors Employee manuals firm s preferences and expectations communicates the firm s policies and reminds employees about the All the needs to be done is the inclusion in a very prominent position of an appropriate statement that there is no promise of any kind by the employer that the employer continues to have the absolute power to fire anyone with or without good cause 1 Disclaimer must be definite unequivocal and clear The handbook can be modified if the employer provides the employee with reasonable Promissory Estoppel notice of the intention to modify the terms of employment induce action or forbearance on the part of the promise and which does induce such action or forbearance is binding if injustice can be avoided only by enforcement of the promise a promise which the promisor should reasonably expect to Week 3 Cont d Woolley v Hoffmann LaRoche Savarse v Pyrene Week 4 Employment at Will the Tort Exception Pierce v Ortho The tort of wrongful discharge also referred to as the policy exception to the employment at will doctrine is based on the termination in violation of public policy Public policy Most courts recognize the tort when an employer dismisses an employee either for engaging in conduct that promotes public policy or for refusing to act in a manner contrary to public policy can lawfully do that which has a tendency to be injurious to the public or against the public good public policy concerns what is right and just and what affects the citizens of the State collectively was intended to convey that principle of law which holds that no citizen 1 Based on either a statutory or a constitutional provision in which provide a clear and compelling mandate for public policy 2 Established by the interests of society as a whole Courts do not recognize the claim where the interest implicated by a discharge is purely private and not of general public concern To succeed on a wrongful discharge claim employees must establish these 4 basic elements 1 She was engaged in conduct protected by a clearly defined public policy 2 Dismissing the employee would jeopardize or undermine the public policy 3 A causal link existed between the employee s conduct and the discharge to indicate that the employer terminated the employee because of the latter s participation in the protected conduct 4 There was no other justification for the