holding that when an employee was removed from his managerial responsibilities overseeing news operations, and was reassigned, at the same salary, to a regular news shift, that he suffered a constructive discharge because he was stripped of his prior managerial functions and left with “no more responsibility” than the newscasters that he had previously supervised
How later courts described this case
- holding that when an employee was removed from his managerial responsibilities overseeing news operations, and was reassigned, at the same salary, to a regular news shift, that he suffered a constructive discharge because he was stripped of his prior managerial functions and left with “no more responsibility” than the newscasters that he had previously supervised
- stating that material change in duties or significant reduction in rank will constitute constructive discharge if unjustified, but finding employer’s action justified because employee incapable of serving in a managerial position
- finding that a corporate vice president was constructively discharged when offered a position that materially reduced his rank
- affirming trial court's finding that employee breached employment contract thereby justifying reassignment
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
YEAGLEY, Associate Judge,
concurring:
I concur in the result and in the opinion except for Section II. In my view, our holding that Brock breached the contract is dispositive of this case. Once the contract was breached, Mutual could rightfully treat it as a nullity and discharge appellant. By the same token, it could choose the less drastic route of reassignment. I do not believe we need to reach the issue of whether the reassignment under the circumstances of this case amounted to a constructive discharge.