Case A: Elaine v. Jerry
The plaintiff, Elaine, has sued the defendant, Jerry, because the defendant fired her after the plaintiff was on the job for two months. The job offer letter that the defendant had sent her mentioned the great career opportunities at the company and stated that her annual salary would be $30,000. The company is an employment-at-will employer. The plaintiff was given no reason for the termination. After the termination, the defendant hired a man named Kramer, who had less job experience and education than the plaintiff, for the position. The plaintiff is suing to get her job back. Based upon the readings and the case the legal issues that are raised are: Did the defendant (Jerry) act ethically in this case? Was the plaintiff wrongfully terminated? And did the defendant engage in sexual discrimination, which is a violation of the Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act?
The Plaintiff can state that she was discriminated based on gender and seek damages due to a breach of contract through the contract exception under the employment at will doctrine (p. 415). In regards to the wrongful termination on the basis sexual discrimination, the plaintiff can claim this because the male employee that replaced Elaine had less experience and education. Although the employer is an at-will employer it is does not need to have employment contracts. The plaintiff can argue that an implied-in-fact contract (p. 416) was enacted between them due to the job offer letter and falls under the contract exception to the doctrine. This implied contract was established with the job offer letter which stated “an annual salary of $30,000” and where Elaine has “great career opportunities”. The annual salary, which at least classifies the contract for a year, and then also the use of the term career, both imply a long term commitment from the company. Also, the plaintiff can argue that she never received an evaluation