some activities to occur without action but terminates another employee for the same or similar activities? Is there an implied acceptance by the employer when certain activities are allowed to continue without intervention even though the activities have been reported to management? What if the terminated employee was the one who reported those activities multiple times.
The exceptions to the "at will" rule are narrow, because the public policy that underlies the rule is to encourage both employers and employees to form relationships as they deem economically appropriate for them; a court will usually not substitute its judgment for that of an employer in determining whom the employer should fire or retain. As a general matter, a practice or policy of an employer will not provide an exception to the "at will" rule unless it is essentially contractual in nature, such as contained in an employee handbook or published in a policy manual. The mere fact that the employer chooses to ignore misconduct from another employee would generally not rise to this level.
Consumers can use this platform to pose legal questions to real lawyers and receive free insights.
Participating legal professionals get the opportunity to speak directly with people who may need their services, as well as enhance their standing in the Lawyers.com community.