The general legal rule is that employees cannot be fired under the tort of wrongful discharge. An employee can argue that the firing clearly conflicts with public policy. Judging from the case, the fact was that the BP Atlantis project might run a certain risk of misoperation, which might lead to a catastrophic disaster. Kenneth Abbott, as a contractor who was hired to oversee BP databases, reported that and got termination abruptly. The issue was that whether it was wrongful discharge and how to deal with the remedies though BP had issued an exculpatory statement in response to Abbot’s allegations.
Maryland law does provide a wrongful discharge cause of action for employees who are terminated because they perform their “statutorily prescribed duty.” But it is relatively conservative in identifying violations of public policy. Maryland courts have found such a mandate only in limited circumstances: (1) “where an employee has been fired for refusing to violate the law…” and (2) “where an employee has been terminated for exercising a specific a specific legal right or duty…” Therefore, if it was under the law of Maryland, a clear investigation should be done to make sure that whether the operation of BP was dangerous as Abbot reported or safe and reliable as BP claimed. Whether there were illegal operations or not? If there were not enough evidence to show that Abbot was fired for refusing to violate the law or exercising a specific legal right or duty, “wrongful discharge” could not stand.
Employees who are professionals owe a special duty to abide not only by federal and state law, but also by the recognized codes of ethics of their professions. New Jersey’s law seems to support more about that an employee has a cause of action for wrongful discharge when the discharge is contrary to a clear mandate of public policy. In certain instances, a professional code of