If you're a manager and have a handbook that provides workers with a limited right to contest proposed discipline, make sure it also has a very strong at-will statement. Otherwise, the promise of discharge only for cause may trap you into expensive and time-consuming litigation every time you have to terminate a worker.
Recent case: Marcellino worked as the co-administrator for a prison. His job required managing the facility while keeping costs down. County employees like Marcellino received an employee handbook. That document specified that "all disciplinary actions shall be for cause."
However, another part of the same handbook included an at-will statement that read, "These rules are not intended to extend employment rights or provide for a property right in employment. Specifically, these rules are not intended to alter employment at will provisions of Minnesota Statutes."
Marcellino's troubles started with what might have been a joke. It turned into something serious when another employee complained that Marcellino had allegedly slipped on a pair of rubber gloves and told a subordinate returning from sick leave that he was going to examine her.
That triggered an extensive investigation into Marcellino's behavior towards women. After many interviews, the HR office determined it should proceed with termination.
Marcellino sued, alleging that he should only have been fired for cause and that he had a property interest in his job. He essentially wanted a full hearing on the allegations and pointed to the "for cause" phrase in the handbook. That, he argued, created, at least, a contractual obligation.
But the court disagreed, pointing to the other at-will statement in the same handbook. It dismissed the claims.
