Can i be fired for defending myself

Grow Your Legal Practice. Meet the Editors. If you've been fired from your job, do you have grounds to challenge the termination? Written Promises If you have a written contract or other statement that promises you job security, you have a strong argument that you are not an at-will employee.

Implied Promises The existence of an implied employment contract—an agreement based on things your employer said and did—is another exception to the at-will rule. In deciding whether an implied employment contract exists, courts look at a number of things, including: duration of your employment regularity of job promotions history of positive performance reviews assurances that you would have continuing employment whether your employer violated a usual employment practice in firing you—such as neglecting to give a required warning, or whether promises of long-term employment were made when you were hired.

Breaches of Good Faith and Fair Dealing If your employer acted unfairly, you may have a claim for a breach of a duty of good faith and fair dealing. Courts have found that employers breached the duty of good faith and fair dealing by: firing or transferring employees to prevent them from collecting sales commissions misleading employees about their chances for promotions and wage increases fabricating reasons for firing an employee when the real motivation is to replace that employee with someone who will work for lower pay soft-pedaling the bad aspects of a particular job, such as the need to travel through dangerous neighborhoods late at night, and repeatedly transferring an employee to remote, dangerous, or otherwise undesirable assignments to coerce the employee into quitting without collecting severance pay or other benefits that would normally be due.

Violations of Public Policy It is illegal to violate public policy when firing a worker—that is, to fire for reasons that society recognizes as illegitimate grounds for termination. Many state and federal laws have specified employment-related actions that clearly violate public policy, such as firing an employee for: disclosing a company practice of refusing to pay employees their earned commissions and accrued vacation pay taking time off work to serve on a jury taking time off work to vote serving in the military or National Guard, or notifying authorities about some wrongdoing harmful to the public whistle-blowing.

Discrimination Employers may not fire even at-will employees for illegal reasons, and discrimination is illegal. Retaliation Employers are forbidden from retaliating against employees who have engaged in certain legally protected activities. To show that you lost your job as a result of your employer's retaliation, you must prove all of the following: You were engaged in a legally protected activity—such as filing a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission or formally complaining to your employer about harassment or discrimination.

That activity prompted your employer to act—for example, you were reprimanded just after your employer found out that you filed a charge of sexual harassment.

Your employer's action had adverse consequences for you—for example, you were fired, denied a promotion, or given a negative performance review that was unwarranted. Fraud In extreme cases, an employer's actions when firing a worker are so devious and wrong that they rise to the level of fraud. To prove that your job loss came about through fraud, you must show all of the following: your employer made a false representation someone in charge knew of the false representation your employer intended to deceive you or tried to induce you to rely on the representation you actually did rely on the representation, and you were harmed in some way by your reliance on the representation.

Defamation A lawsuit for defamation is meant to protect a person's reputation and good standing in the community. Whistle-Blowing Violations Whistle-blowing laws protect employees who report activities that are unlawful or harm the public interest. Talk to a Lawyer Need a lawyer?

Start here. Practice Area Please select Zip Code. How it Works Briefly tell us about your case Provide your contact information Choose attorneys to contact you. The Utah Supreme Court said that the public policy favoring a right of self-defense comes from the Utah Constitution, state statutes, and common law, and that "a policy favoring the right [of self-defense] protects human life and deters crime, conferring substantial benefits on the public.

West Virginia recognizes the claim but allows employers to assert a legitimate business reason as a defense. A federal court in California has held the same way.

The Washington state Supreme Court used a similar approach in a case where the employee was defending a third party. The claim was rejected by another federal court in California, a federal court in Utah in ! Volokh has cites and links, so I'll just send you over there.

I have mixed feelings about self-defense as a public policy supporting a wrongful discharge claim. An employer certainly has legitimate reasons for wanting to discourage employee vigilantism and to refer incidents to law enforcement instead. At the same time, there are rare situations where an employee may have no choice but to defend himself or others.

Remember the ghastly incident almost exactly one year ago in which that poor woman was beheaded, and the killer was stopped only because the CEO shot him?

As a preventive measure, I suppose I would favor having employers adopt something very similar to the Utah standard: withdraw, unless you are in imminent danger of serious bodily harm and can't escape. If you're trapped and feel you have no choice but to confront, then use your best judgment, and we'll try to do the right thing by you when we sort it all out afterward.

That said, I think many employers will disagree with me on this. Please feel free to weigh in. This is a situation where the "zero-tolerance" approach just doesn't strike me as correct.

Shea Partner Email Continue Reading. Printable version. Q In a recent training session on managing risks related to physical violence and aggression at work, an employee asked whether or not employees are allowed to defend themselves by using reasonable force if somebody tries to assault them. A Under health and safety legislation, employers have a duty to manage and control risks to employees, including risks from physical violence and aggression.

In assessing the reasonableness of the force used, prosecutors have to ask two questions. Was the use of force necessary in the circumstances?

Was the force used reasonable in the circumstances? Features A nervous return. The importance of responding to domestic abuse in the workplace.