Court of Appeals Affirms Dismissal of Retaliatory Discharge Claim

In Pharaoh-Carlson v. Hy-Vee, Inc., No. 13-1446 (Iowa App. Feb. 11, 2015), plaintiff alleged that the jury instruction provided by the district court misstated the law regarding the workers' compensation public policy exception to the at-will employment doctrine.  Plaintiff argued that he was discharged for filing a workers' compensation claim while defendant argued that the discharge was due to a no-call, no show on the part of plaintiff.

The court first noted that plaintiff had waived its objection to the jury instruction because the objection to the instruction, although made by plaintiff, was insufficiently specific.  Despite this finding, the court went on to address the merits of the decision.  The instruction to the jury, among other things, indicated that employment at will employees could be discharged for any reason, that it is against public policy to discharge workers for pursuing their right under the workers' compensation act, and indicated it was not against public policy to dismiss for reasons such as absenteeism or job performance.  Claimant argued that this instruction placed no restrictions on the type of absenteeism or job performance that justified firing, and indicated that the instruction required that claimant prove his claims and disprove defendant's affirmative defenses.

The court concluded that the instruction was a proper statement with respect to absenteeism.  The court also found that the record supported the finding that the discharge was premised on three no-call, no shows and poor work performance rather than pursuing workers' compensation.  The court concluded plaintiff was not prejudiced by the instruction, and affirmed the district court.