Home > Legal Updates >

Nevada Rejects Wrongful Discharge Action by Employee Seeking to Unionize Workers

Affirming summary judgment in favor of the employer, the Nevada Supreme Court has declined to recognize a cause of action for wrongful discharge asserted by an employee seeking to organize his fellow workers.  Ozawa v. Vision Airlines Inc., Nos. 49435 & 49660 (Nev. Oct. 1, 2009).  Because the employee had an alternate remedy under the federal Railway Labor Act (“RLA”), the Court declined to recognize a new exception to Nevada’s at-will employment rule.

Leland Ozawa worked as a pilot for the employer.  During his employment, some of the pilots became disgruntled about having to attending training.  Ozawa prepared a petition requesting compensation during the mandatory training sessions.  Thereafter, the employer’s Human Resources Department asked him to bring his pilot manual and badge to the company office, and, although the details surrounding Ozawa’s resignation are disputed, he stopped working for the employer.  Ozawa sued the employer for wrongful discharge based on public policy.  The employer moved for summary judgment, which the trial court granted.

On appeal to the Nevada Supreme Court, Ozawa argued that terminating an employee who sought to organize his co-workers violated Nevada’s public policy.  He claimed that failing to protect this public policy would have a chilling effect on workers seeking to organize.  The Court rejected Ozawa’s arguments. 

Nevada law generally permits employers to terminate at-will employees for any reason, as long as the reason does not offend public policy.  According to the Court, the public policy exception is limited to “rare and exceptional cases” where the employer’s conduct violates a “strong and compelling” public policy.  Further, where an alternate remedy exists, the Court explained, Nevada law will not recognize a claim for wrongful discharge based on public policy.

Although Ozawa identified a strong public policy in Nevada supporting a workers’ right to organize and to bargain collectively with employer, set forth in state statutes N.R.S. 614.090(1) and 613.220, he had an adequate alternate remedy under the RLA, which permits workers to organize and to bargain collectively, the Court determined.  The U.S. Supreme Court has interpreted the RLA to apply to the precertification rights of non-unionized workers, and federal courts, including the Ninth Circuit of Appeals (which includes Nevada), have recognized an implied private cause of action for wrongful discharge based on the RLA.  Accordingly, the Court declined to create a new exception to Nevada’s at-will rule and affirmed summary judgment.

This case reiterates Nevada’s adherence to the at-will rule and limits employees’ ability to create new private actions for public policy where adequate remedies already exist.  However, employers should be cautious when addressing concerns raised collectively by workers to ensure that they do not run afoul of federal labor law.  Jackson Lewis attorneys are available to answer questions about this case, other workplace laws, and the legal issues concerning possible union organizing.