The law of wrongful discharge in Pennsylvania changes slowly. The “extremely strong” presumption is that employees in the state are employed “at-will” and courts have consistently found that “an employee will be entitled to bring a cause of action for a termination of that relationship only in the most limited of circumstances where the termination implicates a clear mandate of public policy,” according to McLaughlin v. Gastrointestinal Specialists, 750 A.2d 283 (Pa. 2000).
In that light, it is not surprising that the most recent appellate court decision finding a new “mandate of public policy” was Shick v. Shirey, 552 A.2d 590 (Pa. 1998), in which the state Supreme Court recognized that termination in retaliation for seeking workers’ compensation benefits stated a viable claim.
Retaliation for Refusing Overtime Prohibited
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
