The Term "Wrongful Termination" Explained (California)
One of the most misunderstood terms in employment law is "wrongful termination". Many, if not most, aggrieved employees believe that "wrongful" in the context of wrongful termination means unfair or hurtful or unjust. Under the law, however, wrongful termination has a much more narrow definition. If you, like most employees of private companies in California, are an "at will" employee, this means that you can be terminated for any reason, no reason, or any reason, with or without notice, as long as it's not a discriminatory or retaliatory reason. Therefore, proving wrongful termination requires showing that there was a legal violation, such as discrimination or retaliation, and not merely a conflict or unfair treatment.
Many employees out there are terminated for extremely unfair reasons, including being falsely accused of misconduct or insubordination or violation of a company policy (in some instance false accusations make give rise to a defamation claim), being written up unfairly, receiving bad performance reviews, etc... but none of the above issues have legal relevance if there is no evidence that they have been motivated by discriminatory or retaliatory reasons, such as due to age, race, gender, sexual orientation, disability, religion or familial status, or due to complaining about safety violations, sexual harassment, certain kinds of mishandling of public funds, and a limited number of other violations.
If you are a member of the union, and you don't have a legal claim for wrongful termination, you may still be able to file a grievance for unjust discipline or unjust termination, since most union contracts provide that their members cannot be terminated unless there is just case.
Members of the union who have sufficient evidence to support a wrongful termination claim, can proceed with both - the lawsuit for wrongful termination and a union grievance. These two processes are separate and independent and pursuing both routes at the same time has a number of strategic advantages.
Many employees out there are terminated for extremely unfair reasons, including being falsely accused of misconduct or insubordination or violation of a company policy (in some instance false accusations make give rise to a defamation claim), being written up unfairly, receiving bad performance reviews, etc... but none of the above issues have legal relevance if there is no evidence that they have been motivated by discriminatory or retaliatory reasons, such as due to age, race, gender, sexual orientation, disability, religion or familial status, or due to complaining about safety violations, sexual harassment, certain kinds of mishandling of public funds, and a limited number of other violations.
If you are a member of the union, and you don't have a legal claim for wrongful termination, you may still be able to file a grievance for unjust discipline or unjust termination, since most union contracts provide that their members cannot be terminated unless there is just case.
Members of the union who have sufficient evidence to support a wrongful termination claim, can proceed with both - the lawsuit for wrongful termination and a union grievance. These two processes are separate and independent and pursuing both routes at the same time has a number of strategic advantages.
