Wal-Mart employees fired for standing their ground against customers can sue, Utah court rules
Image from Shutterstock.
Updated: Wal-Mart employees who don’t follow the company’s non-resistance policy when facing serious, imminent bodily harm by violent customers are protected from termination by state law, Utah’s top court has ruled.
On Thursday, the Utah Supreme Court held that five employees who were fired for violating Wal-Mart’s policy of non-resistance did have grounds for a wrongful termination suit, according to the Wall Street Journal. In a 4-1 ruling (PDF), the court found that the employees had a right to self-defense under the state constitution, as well as the state’s “Stand Your Ground” law, and rejected Wal-Mart’s argument that its interest in de-escalating violent conflicts and discouraging vigilantism trumped the employees’ rights.
The state’s top court had been asked by the district court to settle the following question: “Is the right of self-defense a substantial public policy exception to the at-will employment doctrine that provides the basis for a wrongful discharge action?”
“Although we acknowledge that Wal-Mart‘s interest in regulating its workforce is important, we conclude that there is a clear and substantial public policy in Utah favoring the right of self-defense,” wrote Chief Justice Matthew Durrant. “[T]hat policy is of sufficient magnitude to qualify as a substantial public policy exception to the at-will employment doctrine, but only under the narrow circumstances where an employee cannot withdraw and faces imminent serious bodily injury.”
Justice Thomas Lee disagreed with the majority, writing in his dissent that Wal-Mart had a legitimate interest in maintaining a safe work environment. Noting that the case was still in the summary judgment phase, Lee argued that the court should have let the case continue, stating that “we do not know whether the employee-plaintiffs responded reasonably to an imminent threat or overreacted in the face of a meaningful path for retreat.”
Lorraine P. Brown, an attorney representing the terminated employees, told the Wall Street Journal that the ruling “moves the whole stand-your ground self-defense movement in the United States a notch forward” and “expands the right of self-defense to the workplace.”
On the other hand, a spokesman for Wal-Mart told the Wall Street Journal that the decision “sets a bad precedent” for businesses and their customers. “Our number one concern is always the safety of our customers and associates, and we don’t condone behavior that puts them at risk,” Wal-Mart spokesman Randy Hargrove said to the Wall Street Journal.
Updated at 3:44 p.m. to add a link to the ruling and change the headline and text to better reflect its holdings.
