Lawrence, Jr. v. Rawlins
Decision Date | 30 January 2001 |
Docket Number | 97-00223 |
Parties | GEORGE LAWRENCE, JR., ET AL. v. V. LANE RAWLINS, ET AL.IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE |
Court | Tennessee Court of Appeals |
Appeals from the Chancery Courts for Davidson County: Nos. 96-514-I, 96-1134-II, 96-1706-II, 96-3186-I, 96-3391-I & 97-458-I(II)
These consolidated appeals involve a challenge to the policy of the educational institutions within the State University and Community College System to deny grievance hearings to non-tenured support personnel terminated for poor job performance. After their respective terminations, six employees of four educational institutions filed separate petitions for review or for a common-law writ of certiorari in the Chancery Court for Davidson County alleging that their employers had acted arbitrarily and illegally by terminating them without affording them a grievance hearing. Two chancellors held that Tenn. Code Ann. 49-8-117 (1996) required the educational institutions to make grievance hearings available to non-tenured employees terminated for poor job performance and directed the institutions to provide the employees with hearings. We consolidated these appeals and now concur with the chancellors that these employees have a statutory right to a grievance hearing.
Tenn. R. App. P. 3 Appeals of Right; Judgments of the Chancery Courts Affirmed
WILLIAM C. KOCH, JR., J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which HENRY F. TODD, P.J., M.S., and WILLIAM B. CAIN, J., joined.
Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; William J. Marett, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, for the appellants, Charles E. Smith, James A. Hefner, Roy S. Nicks, V. Lane Rawlins, James E. Walker, Arthur Lawson, East Tennessee State University, Middle Tennessee State University, Tennessee State University, and the University of Memphis.
Michele D. Collins, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellee, Theodore A. Black.
David B. Lyons, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellee, Joseph Perry.
Larry D. Woods, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellees, Melvin N. Cason, Julana Croy, George Lawrence, Jr., and Danny J. Leath.
Irvin H. Kilcrease & Carol L. McCoy, Chancellors
During 1997, two chancellors of the Chancery Court for Davidson County heard six cases challenging the decisions of four educational institutions within the State University and Community College System to deny grievance hearings to six non-tenured support personnel1 who had been terminated between December 1995 and October 1996. The terminations were unrelated, but the grounds for each termination involved the employee's conduct at work or job performance. Each person was employed pursuant to an at-will contract, and each institution had a grievance procedure in place when the terminations occurred. Each employee made a timely request for a grievance hearing, and each of these requests were denied.
George Lawrence, Jr. had been employed as a roofer at the University of Memphis for approximately nine years. On November 15, 1995, he was informed that he was being suspended for "knowingly violat[ing] University safety policy regarding work in an unsafe manner" and refusing to follow his supervisor's instructions. Thereafter, the Associate Director of Physical Plant and Planning recommended that Mr. Lawrence be terminated because he had been "abusive to his supervisor" and because he had failed to "follow instructions when requested by his supervisor and others to discontinue work that he was performing in an unsafe manner." Accordingly, the University of Memphis terminated Mr. Lawrence effective December 11, 1995, and denied his December 19, 1995 request for a hearing. On February 15, 1996, Mr. Lawrence filed suit in the Chancery Court for Davidson County seeking a hearing and reinstatement. He filed an amended complaint on May 6, 1996, seeking a common-law writ of certiorari to review the process to terminate him.
Danny J. Leath worked as a stock clerk for the University of Memphis for over ten years. He was suspended and then terminated effective February 15, 1996, because a co-worker complained about his job performance. The University of Memphis denied his request for a hearing. Mr. Leath filed suit in the Chancery Court for Davidson County on April 9, 1996, requesting a hearing and reinstatement. On May 6, 1996, he filed an amended complaint seeking a common-law writ of certiorari to review his termination.
Joseph Perry was employed as a security officer at Tennessee State University from 1978 until 1996, except for a brief period during the mid-1990s. In a letter dated October 4, 1996, Tennessee State University requested Mr. Perry to resign because of "misconduct, misuse, behavior and . . . work performance." When Mr. Perry declined, he was notified that he would be terminated effective November 27, 1996. After Tennessee State University denied his request for a hearing, Mr. Perry filed suit in the Chancery Court for Davidson County on February 7, 1997, seeking reinstatement and back pay. On June 6, 1997, Mr. Perry filed an amended complaint seeking a common-law writ of certiorari to review his termination.
Theodore A. Black worked as a security officer at Tennessee State University for over eighteen years. He was terminated on March 13, 1996, because he had been sleeping on the job and had permitted an unauthorized person to enter a restricted area for which he was responsible. Tennessee State University denied Mr. Black's request for a hearing on April 12, 1996, and on June 5, 1996, Mr. Black filed a petition for a writ of certiorari in the Chancery Court for Davidson County seeking review of his termination.
Julana Croy was employed as a library assistant at East Tennessee State University for sixteen years. The University terminated Ms. Croy effective August 13, 1996, because of "a general decline in the quality of [her] performance over the past four evaluation cycles." Specifically, the University cited Ms. Croy's "performance level, . . . interactions with supervisors, peers, and student workers, and . . . erratic attendance." The University denied Ms. Croy's request for a grievance hearing on September 4, 1996. Ms. Croy filed suit in the Chancery Court for Davidson County on October 10, 1996, asserting that her termination violated the Americans With Disabilities Act and demanding reinstatement and back pay. In the alternative, she requested judicial review of her termination under a common-law writ of certiorari.
Melvin N. Cason was employed as a custodian at Middle Tennessee State University for thirteen years. The University terminated him on October 12, 1996, because he had a pizza party at his place of employment, falsified his time card, and inadequately performed his duties as custodian. On October 15, 1996, the University denied Mr. Cason's request for a hearing. On October 29, 1996, Mr. Cason filed a complaint in the Chancery Court for Davidson County seeking a common-law writ of certiorari to review his termination.
The various institutions first attempted unsuccessfully to have these complaints dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Thereafter, they filed motions for summary judgment. After the trial court threatened to dismiss Mr. Lawrence's case for lack of prosecution, five of the six employees filed cross motions for summary judgment on March 21, 1997.2 All motions in these five cases were heard on April 25, 1997. On May 12 and 13, 1997, the two chancellors hearing these cases filed essentially identical memorandums. The chancellors concluded that the termination proceedings could not be reviewed as contested cases under the Uniform Administrative Procedures Act but could be reviewed in accordance with a common-law writ of certiorari. The chancellors also concluded that the educational institutions had acted arbitrarily and illegally by terminating each of the five employees because they had denied the employees' requests for a grievance hearing before termination under Tenn. Code Ann. 49-8-117. Accordingly, the chancellors directed each of the educational institutions to provide the employees with a hearing and pretermitted the employees' requests for back pay. On September 11, 1997, one of the chancellors entered a memorandum and order granting Mr. Perry the same relief that had been granted to the other five employees. The educational institutions appealed from these decisions. On October 30, 1997, we consolidated the six cases for argument and disposition.
I.
THE EMPLOYEES' RIGHT TO A GRIEVANCE HEARING
The educational institutions assail the trial courts' decisions as making inappropriate inroads into the employment-at-will doctrine. We disagree. The employment-at-will doctrine is part of the essential public policy of this state. Sullivan v. Baptist Mem'l Hosp., 995 S.W.2d 569, 574 (Tenn. 1999); Nelson v. Martin, 958 S.W.2d 643, 647 (Tenn. 1997). Except for circumstances that would give rise to a retaliatory discharge claim, the doctrine permits either an employee or an employer to terminate an employment relationship at any time with or without good cause. Conatser v. Clarksville Coca-Cola Bottling Co., 920 S.W.2d 646, 647 (Tenn. 1995); Forrester v. Stockstill, 869 S.W.2d 328, 330 (Tenn. 1994).
The employment-at-will doctrine may be modified in three ways. First, the parties themselves may limit the application of the doctrine in an employment contract. Abou_Sakher v. Humphreys County, 955 S.W.2d 65, 69-70 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1997). Second, the doctrine may be limited by statute. Anderson v. Standard Register Co., 857 S.W.2d 555, 556 (Tenn. 1993); Voss v. Shelter Mut. Ins. Co., 958 S.W.2d 342, 343-44 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1997). Third, the courts may limit the doctrine in circumstances where a termination of employment would be contrary to well-defined public policy. Stein v. Davidson Hotel Co., 945 S.W.2d 714, 717 (Tenn. 1997); Reynolds v. Ozark Motor...
To continue reading
Request your trial