Petermann v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Local 396
1 I.E.R. Cas. (BNA) 5, 344 P.2d 25, 174 Cal. App. 2d 184 (1959)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
An employer may not discharge an at-will employee if the reason for the discharge violates a fundamental public policy, such as the policy against perjury.
Facts:
- The plaintiff was hired by the defendant union as a business agent for an indefinite term, contingent on his work being satisfactory.
- The defendant Matula, the union's secretary-treasurer, hired the plaintiff.
- Plaintiff was subpoenaed to testify before a committee of the California Legislature.
- Matula instructed the plaintiff to give false and untrue testimony before the legislative committee.
- The plaintiff disregarded these instructions and gave truthful testimony to the committee.
- The day after he testified, Matula discharged the plaintiff.
- Plaintiff alleges the reason for his discharge was his refusal to commit perjury.
Procedural Posture:
- Plaintiff filed a complaint against the union and its secretary-treasurer, Matula, in a California trial court, alleging wrongful discharge and other claims.
- Defendants' demurrer to the plaintiff's second amended complaint was overruled.
- At the time of trial, defendants made a motion for judgment on the pleadings.
- The trial court granted the defendants' motion for judgment on the pleadings, effectively dismissing the plaintiff's case.
- Plaintiff, as the appellant, appealed the trial court's judgment to the California Court of Appeal.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does the termination of an at-will employee for refusing to commit perjury at the direction of his employer constitute a wrongful discharge that is actionable in a civil suit?
Opinions:
Majority - Fox, P. J.
Yes, terminating an at-will employee for refusing to commit perjury constitutes a wrongful discharge because it violates public policy. While employment for an unspecified duration is generally terminable at the will of either party, this right is limited by considerations of public policy. The state has a clear and fundamental public policy against perjury, as codified in the Penal Code which makes perjury and the solicitation of perjury criminal offenses. Allowing an employer to discharge an employee for refusing to commit a felony would encourage criminal conduct and contaminate the administration of public affairs and justice. Therefore, to effectuate the state's policy against perjury, the civil law must recognize an exception to the at-will employment doctrine and deny an employer the right to discharge an employee for this reason. The court also held that the plaintiff was not required to exhaust internal union remedies for his wrongful discharge claim, as those remedies applied to his status as a union member, not his status as an employee. However, regarding the plaintiff's second claim concerning the issuance of a union withdrawal card, the court found that this action pertained to his membership rights, and he was required to exhaust internal union remedies before seeking judicial relief, which he failed to do.
Analysis:
This case is a landmark decision in California employment law, establishing the tort of wrongful termination in violation of public policy. It created a significant exception to the long-standing doctrine of at-will employment, which previously allowed employers to fire employees for any reason or no reason at all. The decision anchored the public policy exception in statutory law, providing a clear basis for future claims where a discharge contravenes a fundamental policy expressed in a constitutional or statutory provision. This precedent has since been expanded to protect employees from termination for a variety of other reasons that implicate fundamental public policy, such as refusing to participate in illegal schemes or exercising statutory rights.
Unlock the full brief for Petermann v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Local 396