 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
McCrady v. Oklahoma Dep't of Public Safety9/27/2005
__ P.3d __
We previously granted certiorari to the Department of Public Safety's petition to address the first impression question whether a classified employee of the State of Oklahoma may be considered to be an "employee-at-will" for the purpose of being eligible to bring an action in tort for wrongful termination from employment pursuant to Burk v. K-Mart Corp., 1989 OK 22, 770 P.2d 24. We answer the question in the negative and vacate that part of the decision of the Court of Civil Appeals so holding.
The relevant undisputed facts are these. Rodney G. McCrady was a permanent classified employee with the Oklahoma Department of Public Safety (Department), a first Lieutenant with the Oklahoma Highway Patrol, when he was terminated from that position in 2002 for misconduct. This is his second termination from his position with OHP. He was initially terminated in 1995, and was reinstated in 2001 by order of the Merit Protection Commission following his successful appeal.
McCrady sued the Department and Commissioner of Public Safety, Robert Ricks, accusing the Department of intentional infliction of emotional distress and wrongful discharge from employment. He alleged the terminations were imposed in retaliation for his exercise of statutory and constitutional rights, and that the Department's conduct was tortious as it punished activities specifically protected by 74 O.S. 2001, §840-6.2 (c), in violation of the public policy of the State of Oklahoma. That section provides:
"No employee shall be disciplined or otherwise prejudiced in his or her employment for exercising his or her rights under the internal agency grievance resolution procedure. "
The trial court granted summary judgment to both defendants and McCrady appealed. The Court of Civil Appeals affirmed summary judgment in favor of Ricks on all claims, and partially affirmed summary judgment in favor of the Department; on the cause for wrongful termination, the judgment was reversed and the matter remanded for further proceedings. The Court's decision was based on its determination that a disputed issue of fact existed which might support the inference of a retaliatory motive on the part of the Department which would be violative of public policy set forth in 74 O.S. Supp. 2003, § 840-2.5.(C), part of the "Whistleblower's Act" providing as follows:
"Any person who has authority to take, direct others to take, recommend or approve any personnel action shall not take or fail to take any personnel action with respect to any employee for filing an appeal or testifying on behalf of any person filing an appeal with the Oklahoma Merit Protection Commission."
The Department points out that the Court of Appeals raised this issue sua sponte, as the statute was neither cited nor argued at trial or on appeal. The Department argues that irrespective of the Court's treatment of the appeal, the suit was not a whistleblower's action, but was brought in tort for wrongful termination and McCrady is not eligible to bring such an action because he is not an employee-at-will. We agree.
The doctrine of employment-at-will is firmly embedded in the common law of Oklahoma. Collier v. Insignia Financial Group, 1999 OK 491, 981 P.2d 321, 323. Under the doctrine, an employee with an employment contract of indefinite duration is free to leave his or her employment for any reason or no reason without incurring liability to the employer, and the employer has the corresponding freedom to terminate the at-will employee for any reason or no reason without incurring liability to the employee.
In Burk v. K-Mart Corp., 1989 OK 22, 770 P.2d 24, this Court creat
Page 1 2 3 Oklahoma Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|