TOV.WrongfulTermination&Discrimination

Police officer's whistleblower case against City of Ann Arbor is dismissed

Dawn King, a 23-year veteran of the Police Department, suffered two separate injuries to her chest and shoulder during March of 2009.   One resulted from efforts to subdue a prisoner and the injury was apparently aggravated during a training exercise.  The City and its workers comp carrier notified King that it would no longer cover her treatment after an arbitrary date.  It sent King for an Independent Medical Examination (IME) with its hand-selected doctor, who disputed King's doctor's recent confirmation that a bone-scan confirmed a lingering medical issue. 

When the City continued to deny King work comp medical, she sued under the Whistleblower Protection Act, contending that the City's handling of her comp case was retaliation for her efforts, as a union representative, to address unsafe conditions in a City office building. King was apparently pursuing the claim without counsel and she filed hand-written pleadings "admitting" that her supervisors were not aware that she had filed a MIOSHA building complaint when they refused to re-open her workers compensation claim.  In this circumstance, King had essentially admitted that the "adverse employment action" she alleged was not a retaliation for her whistleblowing activities, and therefore she was denied the right to sue.

Whistleblower claim dismissed; employer successfully disputes cause of termination

Carlos Prieskorn sued the University of Michigan Health System, arguing that it violated the Whistleblower Protection Act (WPA) when it fired him during his probationary period.  Prieskorn, a phlebotomist, alleged that the University fired him for reporting patient-safety violations and time-card fraud, but the courts didn't buy his claim.  The University alleged that it terminated Prieskorn for secretly taping a conversation with another staff member and for misleading another employee into giving up hours, falsely claiming that he was acting on a supervisor's order.

The court concluded that there was no question of fact regarding the reason for Prieskorn's firing, even though the supervisor admitted that Prieskorn had reported safety violations and that he was simply tired of Prieskorn's complaining.

 

Employee demoted after reporting suspicions about Kwame Kilpatrick can sue under WPA

Ira Lee Todd sued the City of Detroit and its mayor, Kwame Kilpatrick, after he was demoted from his former position in the Violent Crime Task Force.  He alleged that he was demoted for reporting that a Kentucky resident under criminal investigation was bragging about his relationship with the mayor. For whatever reason, the trial judge had originally concluded that Todd's report of the potential criminal ties between the investigation subject and Kilpatrick did not consitute "protected behavior" under the Whistleblower's Protection Act.    The Court of Appeals rejected the Circuit judge's analysis and reinstated the case.

Whistleblower fired after unnecessary physical confrontation loses WPA protection

William Wielen was a refuse collection worker for the City of Bay City and apparently he made too many complaints about perceived equipment and safety violations.  The City held a meeting with Wielen and a co-worker who was at fault in a truck collision with Wielen's truck.  Records reflect that the co-worker was critical of Wielen, and that the supervisor informed both men that their continuing conflict was damaging morale and endangering their employment. The Co-worker was told to stop claiming Wielen was a "snitch" and told Wielen that he needed to do a better job of getting along with co-workers. 

Worker fired after police report cannot pursue Whistleblower claim.

Christopher Stay worked for Connections Employment Resource in the laundry facility at the Veterans Administration facility in Calhoun County.  In his two years with the company, he accumulated 13 disciplinary actions including a suspension.  In December of 2009, he reached into a laundry bag to "touch" an unfamiliar item identified by another employee, and a supervisory employee apparently slapped his hand back.  The employees sorting laundry were required to wear a double protective layer because of biohazards routinely discarded in the VA laundry, and Stay was unprotected when he reached to touch the unfamiliar object.

Court upholds dismissal of cardiologist's WPA claim that employer violated Federal law

Cardiologist Ronald VanderLaan expressed concern to his partners at Michigan Medical, PC, that the firm was violating federal law by billing for pacemaker work done by vendors without MMPC supervision or involvement. The MMPC Board ordered VanderLaan to see a psychiatrist and undergo a drug test, and suspended his salary.  VanderLaan took his concerns to the U.S. Inspector General and refused to undergo the drug-testing and psychiatric evaluation that his partners were demanding he complete within 30 days.  His employment was then terminated.  VanderLaan's partners claimed that their actions were motivated by the unrelated fact that he was acting erratically, was hostile to co-workers, and had misbehaved at office parties. VanderLaan then filed suit under the WPA. 

The Court of Appeals upheld the dismissal of his Whistleblower Protection Act claim because he had no proof, beyond the timing of his dismissal, corroborating his claim that he was discharged because of his pacemaker concerns and federal report. In a typical Kirsten Kelly opinion, the Court found it "inexplicable" that VanderLaan refused to undergo drug and psychiatric examination at his partners' demand. One wonders how a judge would react if the other judges on the Court of Appeals suspended his or her salary and demanded a psychiatric evaluation and drug test within 30 days.

Chrylser work's WPA claim dismissed despite engagement in protected activity

Lawrence S. King worked as one of three wastewater treastment operators at the Chrysler Detroit Axle Plant.  He filed suit arguing that he was discharged because he reported to City authorities the overflow of contaminated water from the plant. The trial judge dismissed this claim, holding that King's activities were not "protected activity" within the definition in the Whistleblower Protection Act.  The appellate court overturned this holding, noting that an overflow is a violation of city ordinance, making King's actions the report of a "violation of the law." 

Supreme Court says church can fire teacher with theological duties, regardless of claimed disability discrimination

A case arising out of a Lutheran school in Redford, Michigan, has resulted in a new ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court with regard to the parameters of separation of church and state. Cheryl Perich taught at the Hosanna-Tabor Church school.  Her duties included 45 minutes of religion-related instruction per week.  

Perich claimed that the church violated federal law by discriminating against her medical disability, in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act.  She filed an EEOC claim and followed-up with a lawsuit.  The school then fired her for resorting to the Courts to resolve her complaint.  Lower courts had ruled that the Church could be held accountable for a violation of federal law.  The Church appealed, seeking a ruling that under the "ministerial exception" to state and federal law, it had the unfettered right to fire anyone involved in teaching church doctrine, even if the employee's "ministerial" duties were relatively insignificant.

Employees fired after deposition "coaching" can maintain Whistleblower Claim

Raymond Tackett and Thomas McGregor successfully appealed the dismissal of their wrongful discharge and whistleblower claims against Group Five Management Company.   Group Five was apparently being sued because of an electrical fire that was allegedly caused by negligence.  Tackett and McGregor were summoned to a "deposition preparation" meeting, where they were told the suit could put the company out of business and eliminate their jobs.  They were then told that they "did not need to know or remember anything."  When they indicated that they would be truthful and would not lie under oath, they were both subsequently fired.

Hair stylists' claim that they were mistreated for alleging health care fraud is dismissed

Abby Duncan and Samantha Summerfield sued their employer, the Tricho Salon and Spa.  They claimed that they were discriminated against, and mistreated because they had filed a health care fraud report against their employer.  Their original complaint arose out of Tricho's continued deduction of health insurance premium contributions from their paycheck for several months after Blue Cross had canceled their coverage. The employer argued that the cancellation was caused by an error at Blue Cross and was in the process of repair.  The women alleged that they didn't learn of the problem until their health care expenses were denied.