Fact of my case: Determine if Ms. Garcia was an at-will employee or has a viable cause of action for an implied employment contract. Ms. Garcia worked for FBOC for about eight years. I got a job as a teller at First Bank of California in May of 1993. I worked very hard and in 1995 was promoted to branch manger and in 1996 started working in the Accounting Department. I received good reviews from all of my supervisors. As you can see, I was routinely promoted, often received merit raises and got great reviews. She [Helen, the accounting manager] liked my work and told me during my 1997 Performance Review that I would have a long and fruitful career with the Bank. I worked directly under Helen and I had four employees who reported to me. Word on the street was that the Bank was experiencing a budget crisis. I received a two-weeks notice that my services were no longer needed. Kent said something about the Bank trying to save costs. Supposedly it was decided that the Assistant Accounting Manger position was no longer needed. I didn’t sign any contract or documents. They don’t do that in the banking industry. There simply was no reason why the Bank laid me off. Foley v. Interactive Data Corp (Supreme Court of Cal., 1988) Foley was hired in 1976 as an assistant production manager (salary $18,500). No discussion on limitation of termination. Over next 7 years Foley received steady promotions and salary increases. He had repeated oral assurances of job security as long as his performance remained adequate. Handbook had written termination guidelines including a mandatory seven-step pretermination procedure. Plaintiff reasonably believed he would not be discharged except for good cause. Foley learned that his knew supervisor was under investigation from the FBI for embezzlement from his former employer, B of A. 2 months later supervisor told Foley he was to be replaced for performance reasons. He transferred to Waltham as requested. He was told that if he did not transfer he may be demoted, but not fired. He was then notified in Waltham that he was not doing a good job and could continue as Branch Manager if he agreed to go on a performance plan. He agreed and was then fired. Guidelines for Termination In 1988 the Supreme Court of California held, “Labor Code section 2922 establishes a presumption of at-will employment if the parties have made no express oral or written agreement specifying the length of employment or the grounds for termination.” Foley. The supreme court goes on to state that “the presumption of at-will employment may be overcome by evidence of contrary intent. In 1990 a California Court of Appeal followed the “totality of circumstances” test in determining the plaintiff had raised a triable issue of fact as to the existence of an
implied employment contract. Wood v. Loyola Marymount Univ., 218 Cal.App.3d 661 (Cal. Ct. App. 1990). The plaintiff in Wood was employed as a baseball coach for fifteen years without an expressed employment contract. The plaintiff brought a cause of action for breach of an implied employment contract after he was terminated without warning, advanced notice, or any hearing. Id. at 668. The plaintiff produced evidence he had been employed for a fifteen year period, had received repeated oral assurances of job security, and had relied on published policies stating that he would be dismissed only as a “last resort.” See Id. at 667-68. The court held the defendant “engaged in a course of conduct which created a reasonable expectation [of an implied employment contract.]” Id. at 667. Based on the totality of circumstances, in particular the aforementioned facts, the court reversed a summary judgment in favor of the defendants. See Id. at 671.