Joel Dillard PA

Representing Mississippi Workers

Termination for reporting a crime

The McArn Doctrine

Under state law, it is illegal to terminate an employee for reporting a crime, or for refusing to participate in a crime at work. This doctrine was announced in a case called McArn v. Allied Bruce-Terminix Co., Inc., 626 So. 2d 603 (Miss. 1993).

These cases require a pretty comprehensive understanding of the complete criminal code, because a number of things which are never prosecuted are nonetheless technically crimes - i.e., everything from adultery to your March Madness bracket - and most especially in government employment.

The firm's McArn litigation

The firm has litigated a number of these cases. For example, in one case, a teacher in a suburban school district was fired in retaliation for a number of complaints she made about discrimination against her students because of their national origin. In addition to violating Title VI and Title VII of federal law, this also gave rise to a McArn claim because, among other reasons, illegal retaliation is a crime under Miss. Code § 97-9-127.

In another case, there was a suit against an employer too small to be subject to Title VII, where the boss offered an employee money in exchange for sex. This created an environment so hostile she had to quit - which was a constructive discharge in retaliation for refusing to commit the crime of adultery (both were married) and prostitution.

Related: False Claims Act

If the crime at issue happens to be fraud against the government such as medicare fraud or self-dealing/kickbacks, then a qui tam or False Claims Act case may be advisable. These cases can allow the employee to recover significant damages proportional to the scope of the fraud.

This is a complex area on which I will be posting in the blog shortly. This page will be updated at that time.



Specific statutes protecting whistleblowers:

An industry-by-industry guide

Virtually everyone is covered by some OSHA safety regulation or other, but the statute protecting employees that blow the whistle on OSHA safety violations - Section 11(c) of the OSH Act - is famously anemic. It is hard to convince OSHA's whistleblower office that the law has been violated, and if they rule against the employee there is no further recourse.

But there are a number of other industry-specific statutes, many of which do provide extremely robust protections to whistleblowers. These are some of my favorite cases, and this page will provide a brief survey of the law in some of these special industries. This review is not comprehensive.

The strongest protections are in the following industries:

In these cases, if the employee can show that the whistleblowing contributed in any way to their termination, then the employer must affirmatively prove by clear and convincing evidence that they would have fired the employee regardless of the whistleblowing - a difficult standard to meet.

Many of these cases can be tried in either federal court or in the offices of the administrative law judges in the Department of Labor. Although some of the ALJs are worse than others, on the whole the ALJs take their job seriously - and their sole job is, for the most part, protecting whistleblowers, so they really understand these cases.

It is a good forum to be in as an employee - so long as the attorney has experience with the forum and is able to manage the often breakneck pace of this kind of administrative litigation.

Pursuant to MRPC 7.4(a)(2) FREE BACKGROUND INFORMATION AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST

This site is for general information only, and creates no attorney-client relationship. Sending inquiries to the firm does not create an attorney-client relationship.

To get legal advice about an employment law, labor law, federal employee law, whistleblower protection, labor unions, worker cooperatives, immigration, discrimination, harassment, wrongful termination, severance, or any related question, you must first have a conflicts check by the firm. We represent exclusively workers, worker cooperatives and unions, but we still must check for potential conflicts of interest, for example, between a supervisor and employee.

First provide the firm with your name, and the name of the person you are making claims against - and no other information. This allows the firm to check for such conflicts of interest. Until you receive confirmation from an attorney that there is NO CONFLICT, none of the information you provide will be considered confidential. Do NOT provide any confidential information before we have asked you to do so.

Once we have confirmed there is no conflict, you may discuss your matter with the attorney in a little more detail, and, if requested, make an appointment. If at your appointment the firm accepts you as a client in writing, then the attorney will be able to provide you with employment law advice.

.

.

.