Failure to follow constructive discharge preconditions dooms claims

The Arizona Employment Protection Act (AEPA) codifies the state’s public policy favoring at-will employment, which provides that absent a written employment contract stating otherwise, “the employment relationship is severable at the pleasure of either the employee or the employer.” The AEPA effectively limits potential claims an employee may have against his employer based on wrongful termination or constructive discharge (e.g., transforming a resignation into a discharge if the employee can show an employer’s failure to remedy “objectively difficult or unpleasant working conditions” compelled him to resign). For employers that exercise their rights to the AEPA safe harbor, employees wishing to pursue constructive discharge claims must comply with certain preconditions.

Moving on up or out

Thomas Gerard was hired in sales at a project management company. He claims he accepted employment based on misrepresentations and material omissions. Specifically, he alleges the company overstated its products' efficacy and viability and set unattainable goals. According to him, the situation caused him not to receive expected commissions and bonuses.

After eight months with the company, Gerard resigned, claiming he had been “strung along, lied to, pressured to falsify his results and otherwise mistreated until he literally couldn’t take it anymore.” He sued the company, asserting claims for fraudulent misrepresentation and negligence. His claimed damages for thousands of dollars in lost bonus pay and commissions and emotional distress.