In these states, employees are regularly protected from retaliatory discrimination even if they have not yet filed formal worker's compensation claims โ because such protection furthers the legislature's remedial intent. See, e.g., Nicholson v. Transit Mgmt., 781 So.2d 661 (La.Ct.App. 2001); Keystone Foods Corp. v. Meeks, 662 So.2d 235 (Ala. 1995); Abels v. Renfro Corp., 335 N.C. 209, 436 S.E.2d 822 (1993); Overnite Transp. Co. v. Gaddis, 793 S.W.2d 129 (Ky.Ct.App. 1990); Buckner v. Gen. Motors Corp., 760 P.2d 803 (Okla. 1988); Roseborough v. N.L. Indus., 10 Ohio St.3d 142, 462 N.E.2d 384 (1984); Delano v. City of S. Portland, 405 A.2d 222 (Me. 1979); Tex. Steel Co. v. Douglas, 533 S.W.2d 111 (Tex.Civ.App. 1976). Like the anti-discrimination clauses of the statutes above, the anti-discrimination provision of the Bankruptcy Code protects an employee seeking to exercise his statutory right.
Although this theory has been applied to some other termination statutes, it has not been applied to the statute upon which Woodard relies. See Keystone Foods v. Meeks, 662 So.2d 235, 237 (Ala.1995) (applying constructive termination to a wrongful discharge claim). The Alabama courts would be best-positioned to determine whether the word โterminationโ in ยง 11โ43โ230(a) also includes a โconstructive termination.โ
" ยง 25-5-11.1. "In order to establish a prima facie case of retaliatory discharge, the plaintiff must present substantial evidence that he was terminated solely for seeking workers' compensation benefits." Kent Corp., 699 So.2d at 958, citing Keystone Foods Corp. v. Meeks, 662 So.2d 235 (Ala. 1995). Here, the evidence reflects that Carson was furloughed and then laid off along with the rest of the work crew in accordance with a typical reduction in force.
The trial court did not issue a written order stating its reasons for entering summary judgment in favor of the defendant. The Court of Civil Appeals affirmed the judgment of the trial court without opinion on the authority of Consolidated Stores, Inc. v. Gargis, 686 So.2d 268 (Ala.Civ.App.), cert. denied, 686 So.2d 278 (Ala. 1996); Keystone Foods Corp. v. Meeks, 662 So.2d 235 (Ala. 1995); Grider v. McKenzie, 659 So.2d 612 (Ala.Civ.App. 1994); and Continental Eagle Corp. v. Mokrzycki, 611 So.2d 313 (Ala. 1992). The following pertinent facts were before the trial court for its reconsideration of the motion for summary judgment.
In order to establish a prima facie case of retaliatory discharge, the plaintiff must present substantial evidence that he was terminated solely for seeking workers' compensation benefits. Keystone Foods Corp. v. Meeks, 662 So.2d 235 (Ala. 1995). Constructive discharge is included within the meaning of "terminated" as that term is used in ยง 25-5-11.1. Twilley v. Daubert Coated Products, Inc., 536 So.2d 1364 (Ala. 1988).
"An employee proves constructive termination by presenting substantial evidence that the employer deliberately made the employee's working conditions so intolerable that the employee was forced to resign." Keystone Foods Corp. v. Meeks, 662 So.2d 235 (Ala. 1995). Hammock asserts that his employment with Ryder was terminated on July 4, 1996, but that later Gray offered him a settlement if he would voluntarily resign.
In order to establish a prima facie case of retaliatory discharge, an employee must present substantial evidence that he or she was terminated for seeking to obtain workers' compensation benefits. Keystone Foods Corp. v. Meeks, 662 So.2d 235 (Ala. 1995). Weldon failed to present any evidence that he was in fact "terminated."
Troup insists that she was constructively terminated. "An employee proves a constructive termination by presenting substantial evidence that the employer deliberately made the employee's working conditions so intolerable that the employee was forced to resign." Keystone Foods Corp. v. Meeks, 662 So.2d 235 (Ala. 1995). Troup relies primarily on National Security Insurance Co. v. Donaldson, 664 So.2d 871 (Ala. 1995), to support her position.