The Plaintiff, an information technology support specialist employed through a staffing agency, was employed on-site at an Assembly Plant. In April 2016, the Plaintiff complained to his staffing agency supervisor that he believed there was an issue with asbestos insulation in one of the work areas at the Assembly Plant. The Plaintiff e-mailed photographs of the suspected problem area to his supervisor, and the plaintiff’s supervisor sent the photographs to the Assembly Plant’s health and safety manager. The safety manager then consulted with an outside expert who determined that there was no asbestos issue.
In May 2016, the Assembly Plant announced that it would be ending production of a specific vehicle and the shift that the Plaintiff supported would be eliminated. Two of the Plaintiff’s coworkers were recommended for transfer to other plants, while the plaintiff was released from employment.
The Plaintiff sued both the staffing company and the Assembly Plant, alleging they were his joint employers. One of the Plaintiff’s claims—unlawful discharge in violation of public policy—alleged that his purported joint employers “wrongfully terminated him because of his failure or refusal to violate the law in the course of his employment.”
With respect to the Plaintiff’s public policy claim, the trial court dismissed it, and the Court of Appeals affirmed, stating: “There is no Michigan caselaw extending the public policy exception to discharges in retaliation for internal reporting of alleged violations of the law [ ].” The Michigan Supreme Court, however, reversed the Court of Appeals on the Plaintiff’s public-policy claim, stating it sees “no reason why limiting public-policy claims to external reports would serve the welfare of the people of Michigan.”
Practical Takeaways
Michigan law generally presumes that employment relationships are terminable at the will of either party, although there are many established exceptions to this doctrine. For employers defending wrongful discharge claims in violation of public policy (one of those exceptions), the Michigan Supreme Court has made clear that internal, as well as external complaints, will suffice to support such a claim.
If you have any questions, please contact:
- Larry Jensen at ljensen@wp.hallrender.com or (248) 457-7850; or
- Your primary Hall Render contact.
Special thanks to Jennifer Davis, Summer Associate, for her assistance in the preparation of this article.
Hall Render blog posts and articles are intended for informational purposes only. For ethical reasons, Hall Render attorneys cannot—outside of an attorney-client relationship—answer specific questions that would be legal advice.
