## Facts

- La-Z-Boy hired Marilyn Touchard to investigate workplace safety and high workers’ compensation costs.
- Touchard concluded that production-line practices contributed to shoulder injuries and that employees experienced delays in diagnosis and treatment that she attributed to mismanagement of claims.
- She reported to management and human resources that a claims adjuster was hostile toward injured employees and that alternative work assignments were demeaning, discouraging injury reporting.
- Touchard alleged that management criticized her, restricted her from discussing employee-rights issues with employees, and accused her of “coaching” employees to sue the company.
- After she reported that La-Z-Boy was improperly denying an employee workers’ compensation benefits, she alleged she was threatened with termination if she spoke to employees about injuries or claims.
- Several months later, La-Z-Boy terminated Touchard.
- Touchard and other employees sued in federal court, asserting wrongful termination in violation of Utah public policy tied to workers’ compensation rights.
- The federal district court certified questions of Utah law to the Utah Supreme Court.

## Issues

1. Whether terminating an employee in retaliation for exercising rights under the Utah Workers’ Compensation Act violates a clear and substantial public policy supporting a tort claim for wrongful termination.
2. If so, whether the claim applies when the employee resigns under circumstances constituting constructive discharge.
3. If so, whether the claim applies to retaliation that results only in harassment or discrimination short of actual or constructive discharge.
4. If so, whether the claim applies when the employee did not file for benefits but is retaliated against for opposing the employer’s treatment of other injured employees.

## Decision

- The Utah Supreme Court answered the certified questions without resolving factual disputes.
- Retaliatory discharge for filing a workers’ compensation claim violates Utah public policy and supports a wrongful discharge claim.
- The same public-policy claim is available when retaliation produces a constructive discharge.
- The Court declined to extend the claim to employees who suffer only harassment or discrimination without discharge or constructive discharge.
- The Court declined to extend the claim to employees who did not file for benefits but were retaliated against for opposing the employer’s treatment of other injured employees.

## Legal Principles

- Utah presumes employment for an indefinite term is at-will; termination is generally lawful unless prohibited by law.
- Utah recognizes a narrow tort for wrongful termination in violation of public policy when an employer’s discharge contravenes a clear and substantial public policy.
- The Utah Workers’ Compensation Act embodies a clear and substantial public policy protecting employees’ ability to claim benefits without retaliation.
- A public-policy wrongful discharge claim based on workers’ compensation retaliation is limited to discharge or constructive discharge for claiming one’s own benefits, not to adverse treatment short of discharge or retaliation for advocacy on behalf of others.

## Conclusion

Utah law permits a wrongful termination claim when an employee is fired or constructively discharged in retaliation for filing a workers’ compensation claim, but it does not extend that tort to harassment without discharge or to retaliation against employees who merely oppose the employer’s treatment of other injured workers.


Touchard v. La-Z-Boy Inc., 148 P.3d 945 (Utah 2006)