Wrongful termination or wrongful discharge is a general reference to the illegal termination or firing of an employee. Because most employment is at will, for an indefinite term, and may be terminated at any time, wrongful termination or wrongful discharge claims are generally limited to circumstances under which (1) the employer violated an employee’s written employment agreement and terminated the employee for a reason other than good cause, or (2) the employer terminated or fired the employee for a discriminatory reason (age, race, color, sex, national origin, disability) in violation of federal or state law.

Most states follow the employment-at-will doctrine, and employment for an indefinite term may be terminated at will and without cause. Absent a specific contract term to the contrary, this doctrine allows an employee to quit or be terminated without liability on the part of the employer or the employee, with or without cause.

A discharged employee who asserts that the parties have contractually agreed to limit the employer’s right to terminate the employee at will has the burden of proving an express agreement or written representation to that effect. To rebut the presumption of employment at will, an employment contract must directly limit—in a meaningful and special way—the employer’s right to terminate the employee without cause.

In an employment-at-will situation, an employee policy handbook or manual does not, by itself, constitute a binding contract for the benefits and policies stated unless the manual uses language clearly indicating an intent to do so. In those cases holding that personnel manuals may create contractual rights, there is either language in the manuals expressing contractual intent, or the manuals were complemented by oral agreements making the policy provisions binding.

Thus, to prove a claim for wrongful discharge in breach of an employment agreement, a plaintiff must prove (1) the plaintiff had an enforceable employment agreement that directly limited—in a meaningful and special way—the employer’s right to terminate the employee without cause; (2) the plaintiff performed, tendered performance, or was excused from performing the contractual obligations; (3) the defendant breached the contract by wrongfully discharging the plaintiff from employment; and (4) the defendant’s breach of the employment contract caused the plaintiff damage.

The employment at will doctrine does not permit an employer to discriminate against an employee in violation of state or federal law, including Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. §2000e); the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA) (29 U.S.C. §621); and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) (42 U.S.C. §12101).

In Idaho, as in most states, the default employment relationship is 'at-will,' meaning that either the employer or the employee can terminate the employment at any time, with or without cause, unless there is a specific contract that states otherwise. To establish a wrongful termination claim in breach of an employment agreement, an employee must demonstrate that there was an enforceable contract that significantly limited the employer's right to terminate without cause, that the employee fulfilled their contractual duties, that the employer breached the contract by wrongfully discharging the employee, and that this breach caused damages to the employee. Employee handbooks or manuals generally do not create a binding contract unless they contain language that clearly indicates an intent to offer contractual rights. Additionally, the at-will employment doctrine does not allow employers to terminate employees for discriminatory reasons, which would be in violation of federal laws such as Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, and the Americans with Disabilities Act.