Florida Courts apply the employment-at-will doctrine in most discharge actions, De Marco v. Publix Supermarkets, Inc., 360 So.2d 134 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1978), affirmed 384 So.2d 1253 (Fla. 1980). Likewise, there is no obligation on the part of an employer to be fair or exercise good faith towards employees, Muller v. Stromberg Carlson Corp., 427 So.2d 266 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1983). However, there are certain exceptions which prohibit discharge or retaliation.
Discrimination – Florida Human Relations Act (FHRA) of 1977 as amended: Discrimination in employment based on race, color, religion, sex, (including same-sex harassment) national origin, age, disability, or marital status is prohibited. §760.10 Fla. Stat. For same-sex harassment, See Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services, 118 . Ct. 998 (1998).
NOTE: The FHRA also prohibits discrimination against employees because they opposed, made a charge or assisted in the investigation of discrimination. See §760.37 Fla. Stat.
I wonder which of these she's basing her discrimination claim on?
The three major exceptions to the employment-at-will doctrine, as developed in common law, including recognition of these exceptions in the 50 States. The exceptions principally address terminations that, although they technically comply with the employment-at-will requirements, do not seem just. The most widespread exception prevents terminations for reasons that violate a State's public policy. Another widely recognized exception prohibits terminations after an implied contract for employment has been established; such a contract can be created through employer representations of continued employment, in the form of either oral assurances or expectations created by employer handbooks, policies, or other written assurances. Finally, a minority of States has read an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing into the employment relationship. The good-faith covenant has been interpreted in different ways, from meaning that terminations must be for cause to meaning that terminations cannot be made in bad faith or with malice intended. Only six western States--Alaska, California, Idaho, Nevada, Utah, and Wyoming--recognize all three of the major exceptions.(4) Three southern States--Florida, Georgia, and Louisiana--and Rhode Island do not recognize any of the three major exceptions to employment at will.
If one investigates even further, they'll find that the South is a whole different animal, then say...California, in regards to At Will, exceptions, etc. A convo with an experienced Labor Attorney or EEOC officer is far more revealing than a laypersons internet search
Again,
We'll see.
