A new ruling from a California appeal court demonstrates why you can’t interfere with the away-from-work activities—including political activities—of your employees.
The case involved Najee Ali, the community affairs columnist for the monthly newspaper L.A. Focus. While he was a guest on a local radio show, Ali voiced his personal support for Antonio Villaraigosa, a candidate in an upcoming Los Angeles mayoral election. Ali also criticized U.S. Representative Maxine Waters for supporting Villaraigosa’s opponent James Hahn. Ali’s appearance on the show was not connected to his work for L.A. Focus.
Ali was fired a week after his radio appearance. L.A. Focus owner Jheryl Busby allegedly told Ali he had no choice but to fire Ali to appease Waters, who was Busby’s longtime friend and upset about Ali’s radio show comments.
Sacked Employee Files Wrongful Termination Lawsuit
Ali turned around and sued L.A. Focus for wrongful termination in violation of public policy barring employer interference with employee political activity. The newspaper countered that it was entitled to terminate Ali for speaking in a manner that violated the editorial policy of its newspaper.
A trial court dismissed Ali’s claims, and he appealed. Now a California appeal court has given him the green light to pursue his wrongful termination case against L.A. Focus.
400+ pages of state-specific, easy-read reference materials at your fingertips—fully updated! Check out the Guide to Employment Law for California Employers and get up to speed on everything you need to know.
Political Activity Protected
The court explained that California public policy prohibits employers from terminating employees for their political activity. The court pointed to Labor Code section 1101, which provides that employers can’t make a rule or policy that forbids or prevents employees from engaging or participating in politics. In addition, Labor Code section 1102 bars employers from threatening discharge to coerce an employee to adopt or follow a particular political action or activity.
The court said Ali’s claims fell within the protections of these statutes, although he’ll still need to prove them to a jury. The court also rejected L.A. Focus’s reliance on an earlier case upholding a newspaper’s right to terminate a reporter because the content of his articles conflicted with the paper’s editorial policies. That case didn’t apply here because Ali never asserted he was fired because of the content of his columns.
Don’t Interfere
This case highlights the dangers of terminating an employee because of their political activities or beliefs. Note that “politics” isn’t limited to traditional election campaigns but may extend to social issues such as abortion rights, environmental causes, and affirmative action.
Keep in mind, too, that another California law more broadly bars employers from demoting, disciplining, or firing an employee for lawful conduct occurring during nonwork hours away from your premises. This law bars interference with an employee’s lawful conduct during their personal time—a practice sometimes referred to as “lifestyle discrimination.”