To demonstrate constructive discharge under Oregon law, Magee must show “that she experiencefd] a concrete change in the terms and conditions of her employment that caused her to resign.” Wiederhold v. Sears, Roebuck and Co., 888 F.Supp.2d 1065, 1083 (D. Or. 2012) (quoting Wood v. GCC Bend, LLC, 270 Fed.Appx. 484, 486 (9th Cir. 2008); accord Kallio v. Columbia Cty. Dep‘t of Roads, Case No. cv-07-1211-HU, 2009 WL 103565, at *7 (D. Or. Jan. 13, 2009) (“to prove constructive discharge [under Oregon law], a plaintiff must show that (1) the employer intentionally created working conditions that (2) were so intolerable that a reasonable person would have resigned; and (3) the employer created these conditions because it wanted the employee to resign; and (4) the employee left because of those conditions.”). B. Analysis
Arguments presented in this section replicate the arguments presented against plaintiff's retaliation claim. Under Oregon law, plaintiff's common law wrongful discharge claim is precluded by a statutory claim providing an adequate remedy.Whitlev v. City of Portland, 2009 WL 2485773, at **26-27 (D. Or. Aug. 13, 2009); Kallio v. Columbia County Dept. of Roads, 2009 WL 103565, at *6 (D. Or. Jan. 13, 2009) (citing Anderson v. Evergreen Int'l Airlines, Inc., 131 Or. App. 726, 734, 886 P.2d 1068 (1994)). In Whitley, the court found that the statutory remedy for a sexual harassment claim, Or. Rev. Stat. § 659A.885, provided an adequate remedy for a common law wrongful discharge claim.