In Trosper v. Bag 'N Save, the Nebraska Supreme Court addressed whether an employee's demotion for seeking compensation rightfully owed him under the State's workers' compensation laws falls within the State's public policy exception to the at-will employment doctrine. Already having recognized a public policy exception when an employee is discharged for seeking compensation under the State's workers' compensation laws, the specific issue facing the Court was whether retaliatory demotion should be protected to the same extent as retaliatory discharge. Part II of this Note provides the background law relevant to Trosper. Section A offers a brief synopsis on Nebraska's at-will employment doctrine and application of the public policy exception. Section B summarizes the majority, concurring, and dissenting opinions in Trosper. Section C addresses case law from other jurisdictions that the Court extensively relied on in Trosper. The crux of this Note is the Analysis contained in Part III, which is broken into two closely related sections. Section A contends that Trosper reached the proper conclusion by holding that a private right of action for retaliatory demotion is necessary when a private right of action for retaliatory discharge has already been recognized, but recognizes that doing so inserts ambiguity into the law. Section B seeks to resolve that ambiguity by providing a guidebook for courts and employers dealing with the nebulous concept of retaliatory demotion. Part IV offers some concluding thoughts on how courts and employers should address the post-Trosper ambiguity.
Resolving the Ambiguity-A post-Trosper Guidebook for Courts and Employers: Trosper v. Bag 'N Save, 273 Neb. 855, 734 N.W.2d 704 (2007),
87 Neb. L. Rev.
Available at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nlr/vol87/iss1/5