Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
P worked at D's coal mine as a technician in the preparation plant. Hanson was the mine superintendent, Totin was the mine supervisor of employee relations, and Gustafson was the preparation plant supervisor. D contends that he resigned from his position at the mine following rumors that he had sexually harassed a female co-employee. P contends the resignation resulted from a meeting with Hanson, Totin, and Gustafson where P was told he had the choice of either resigning or being fired. When P applied for the position, he signed a statement on his employment application which said in part: I agree that any offer of employment, and acceptance thereof, does not constitute a binding contract of any length and that such employment is terminable at the will of either party, subject to applicable state and/or federal laws. But when P started work he received an employee handbook. The handbook stated that it was not a company 'comprehensive policies and procedures manual, nor an employment contract.' The handbook did make a large number of broad and promissory statements. D was supposedly 'committed to maintaining an environment of mutual trust, understanding, and cooperation' and that D encouraged communication between employees and supervisors on an informal basis. There was 'a Fair Treatment Procedure that afforded an employee the opportunity to be heard, without fear of reprisal.' This 'Fair Treatment Procedure' was a detailed four-step procedure in which an employee discussed a problem with a supervisor. If the employee was not satisfied with the outcome of this discussion, the employee could take the matter to other supervisory personnel. The handbook had a detailed a disciplinary procedure. It included a noninclusive list of behaviors that D would not condone and a five-step disciplinary process. These steps were: (1) counseling; (2) written reprimand; (3) final written reprimand; (4) three-day suspension; and (5) discharge. The handbook stated that 'union representation [was] unnecessary for employees to enjoy job security, career opportunities, consistent treatment, and competitive wages and benefits.' The handbook listed seven 'fundamental obligations' for D to fulfill such as allowing employees to develop their job abilities and regularly keeping them informed of their progress. to invite constructive suggestions and criticism and guarantee the right to be heard without fear of reprisal, and give helpful consideration when an employee makes a mistake or has a personal problem with which we are asked to help. P sued D claiming breach of contract, breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, negligence, and defamation. P claimed that D modified the at will employment contract to such an extent that D could be fired only for cause. P alleged that he relied on the promises in the handbook. D moved to dismiss the suit arguing that the handbook did not modify the at will relationship. The court granted D’s motion to dismiss and P appealed.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co