Law Offices of John Michael Jensen

Wrongful Termination

California Law About Wrongful Termination of Employment

call now 310-312-1100

Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing

Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing

The concept of “Breach of Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing” in the context of employment contracts, particularly in the state of California, is a nuanced area of employment law. Here’s an extensive overview:

1. Legal Foundation

  • Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing: This is an implicit agreement integrated into every contract in California. It requires that neither party will do anything to unfairly interfere with the right of the other to receive the benefits of the contract.
  • Application in Employment Contracts: Although employment in California is generally “at-will” (meaning either employer or employee can terminate the employment for any reason), this covenant applies to the manner in which employment decisions are made.

2. Essential Factual Elements

  • Existence of a Contractual Relationship: It must be established that there was an employment contract (explicit or implied) between the parties.
  • Breach of the Covenant: Actions or decisions by the employer that are contrary to the spirit of the agreement, leading to the unfair deprivation of the agreed benefits to the employee.
  • Damages: The employee must prove that they suffered damages as a result of this breach.

3. Examples of Breach

  • Unfair Termination Practices: Terminating an employee to avoid paying bonuses, commissions, or other benefits due.
  • Mistreatment or Harassment: Creating a hostile work environment to coerce an employee into resigning.
  • Promotion and Compensation: Unfairly denying promotions or compensation that an employee would have reasonably expected based on the contract.

4. Legal Consequences

  • Compensatory Damages: The wronged party is entitled to compensation to cover financial losses and other harm caused by the breach.
  • Punitive Damages: In some cases, punitive damages may be awarded to punish particularly egregious conduct.
  • Reinstatement: Occasionally, courts may order the reinstatement of the employee.

5. Challenges in Legal Context

  • Proof of Bad Faith: Demonstrating the employer’s bad faith or malintent can be challenging.
  • At-Will Employment Clause: Balancing the covenant with California’s at-will employment doctrine.
  • Vague Definitions: The broad and somewhat subjective nature of “good faith and fair dealing” can make legal outcomes unpredictable.

6. Case Studies and Examples

  • Case 1: A high-performing employee was terminated just before a substantial commission was due. The court found this timing to be a breach of good faith.
  • Case 2: An employee faced systematic harassment after filing a complaint, leading to a constructive dismissal. The court ruled this as a breach of the covenant.

7. Problems That Could Arise

  • Uncertainty in Employment Relationships: Fear of potential lawsuits might lead to employers being overly cautious in personnel decisions.
  • Economic Impact on Businesses: The cost of litigation and potential damages can be significant for businesses.
  • Subjectivity in Judgments: The broad nature of the covenant may lead to inconsistent court decisions.

8. Conclusion

The implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing adds a layer of protection for employees against unfair employment practices in California. However, its subjective nature and the interplay with the at-will employment doctrine create a complex legal landscape that both employers and employees must navigate carefully.

________________

Call 310-312-1100 Now to schedule a time to discuss your matter with Attorney John Michael Jensen.

Additional Information

Overview of the Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing in Employment Contracts in California:

In California, employment contracts are subject to the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. This means that both the employer and employee have an implied duty to act in good faith and deal fairly with each other in the performance of the employment contract. Breach of this implied covenant can lead to legal consequences, especially in cases of wrongful termination.

Essential Factual Elements for a Breach of Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing Claim:

To establish a claim for the breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing in the context of wrongful termination in California, several essential factual elements must be proven:

  1. Existence of Employment Contract: The plaintiff (the terminated employee) must demonstrate the existence of an employment contract, whether oral or written, that sets forth the terms and conditions of employment.
  2. Breach of Implied Covenant: The plaintiff must show that the employer breached the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing by engaging in unfair or bad faith conduct that deprived the employee of the benefits and protections of the employment contract.
  3. Causation: The plaintiff must establish a causal connection between the employer’s bad faith conduct and the employee’s termination.
  4. Damages: The plaintiff must prove that they suffered damages as a result of the breach, such as lost wages, benefits, emotional distress, or other related losses.

Legal Consequences for the Employer:

If the plaintiff successfully proves all the elements of a breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing claim, the employer may be subject to various legal consequences, including:

  1. Compensatory Damages: These are designed to compensate the employee for the losses suffered as a result of the breach, which may include lost wages, benefits, and emotional distress damages.
  2. Punitive Damages: In egregious cases where the employer’s conduct is particularly malicious, oppressive, or fraudulent, punitive damages may be awarded to punish the employer and deter similar conduct in the future.
  3. Reinstatement or Front Pay: In some cases, a court may order the employer to reinstate the wrongfully terminated employee or provide front pay (future lost earnings) as a remedy.

Problems and Challenges:

  1. Subjective Nature: Proving a breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing can be challenging because it often involves demonstrating the employer’s subjective state of mind, which can be difficult to establish.
  2. Employer Defenses: Employers may assert defenses, such as legitimate business reasons for the termination, to counter allegations of bad faith or unfair dealing.
  3. Ambiguity in Contracts: Employment contracts may have ambiguous terms, making it challenging to determine whether the implied covenant was breached.
  4. Evidence Gathering: Collecting evidence of bad faith or unfair conduct by the employer can be a complex process, as it may require access to internal documents or witness testimony.

Example:

Let’s consider an example involving a breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing in California:

Sarah has been employed by ABC Corp for 10 years and has consistently received positive performance reviews. Her employment contract specifies that she can only be terminated for cause. However, ABC Corp suddenly terminates her without providing a reason.

Sarah files a lawsuit claiming breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. She argues that ABC Corp acted in bad faith by terminating her without cause, depriving her of the job security promised in her employment contract.

ABC Corp defends itself by claiming that it had a legitimate business reason for the termination, such as a downturn in the industry. The court will need to consider the evidence presented by both parties, including Sarah’s performance, the company’s financial situation, and whether the termination was consistent with the terms of the contract.

Conclusion

In conclusion, a breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing can have significant legal consequences for employers in California, especially in cases of wrongful termination. However, these cases can be legally complex and require a thorough examination of the employment contract, the circumstances of termination, and potential defenses. Consulting with an attorney experienced in California employment law is essential to navigate these issues effectively.

Call 310-312-1100 Now to schedule a time to discuss your matter with Attorney John Michael Jensen.

2423. Breach of Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing—Employment Contract—Essential Factual Elements

In every employment [contract/agreement] there is an implied promise of good faith and fair dealing. This implied promise means that neither the employer nor the employee will do anything to unfairly interfere with the right of the other to receive the benefits of the employment relationship. Good faith means honesty of purpose without any intention to mislead or to take unfair advantage of another. Generally speaking, it means being faithful to one’s duty or obligation. However, the implied promise of good faith and fair dealing cannot create obligations that are inconsistent with the terms of the contract.

[Name of plaintiff] claims that [name of defendant] violated the duty implied in their employment [contract/agreement] to act fairly and in good faith. To establish this claim, [name of plaintiff] must prove all of the following:

1. That [name of plaintiff] and [name of defendant] entered into an employment relationship;

[2. That [name of plaintiff] substantially performed [his/her/nonbinary pronoun] job duties [unless [name of plaintiff]’s performance was excused [or prevented]];]

[3. That all conditions required for [name of defendant]’s performance [had occurred/ [or] were excused];]

  1. That [name of defendant] [specify conduct that the plaintiff claims prevented plaintiff from receiving the benefits under the contract];
  2. That by doing so, [name of defendant] did not act fairly and in good faith; and
  3. That [name of plaintiff] was harmed by [name of defendant]’s conduct.

New September 2003; Revised November 2019, May 2020

Directions for Use

In every contract, there is an implied promise that each party will not do anything to unfairly interfere with the right of any other party to receive the benefits of the contract. (Comunale v. Traders & General Ins. Co. (1958) 50 Cal.2d 654, 658 [328 P.2d 198].) Give this instruction if the employee asserts a claim that the employee’s termination or other adverse employment action was in breach of this implied covenant. If the existence of a contract is at issue, see instructions on contract formation in the 300 series.

23

Include element 2 if the employee’s substantial performance of the employee’s required job duties is at issue. Include element 3 if there are conditions precedent that the employee must fulfill before the employer is required to perform. In element 4, insert an explanation of the employer’s conduct that violated the duty to act in good faith.

Do not give this instruction if the alleged breach is only the termination of an at- will contract. (See Eisenberg v. Alameda Newspapers (1999) 74 Cal.App.4th 1359, 1391 [88 Cal.Rptr.2d 802].)

See also the Sources and Authority to CACI No. 325, Breach of Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing—Essential Factual Elements, for more authorities on the implied covenant outside of employment law.

Sources and Authority

  • Contractual Conditions Precedent. Civil Code section 1439.
    • “We therefore conclude that the employment relationship is not sufficiently similar to that of insurer and insured to warrant judicial extension of the proposed additional tort remedies in view of the countervailing concerns about economic policy and stability, the traditional separation of tort and contract law, and finally, the numerous protections against improper terminations already afforded employees.” (Foley v. Interactive Data Corp. (1988) 47 Cal.3d 654, 693

[254 Cal.Rptr. 211, 765 P.2d 373].)

  • “A breach of the contract may also constitute a breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. But insofar as the employer’s acts are directly actionable as a breach of an implied-in-fact contract term, a claim that merely realleges that breach as a violation of the covenant is superfluous. This is because, as we explained at length in Foley, the remedy for breach of an employment agreement, including the covenant of good faith and fair dealing implied by law therein, is solely contractual. In the employment context, an implied covenant theory affords no separate measure of recovery, such as tort damages.” (Guz v. Bechtel National, Inc. (2000) 24 Cal.4th 317, 352 [100

Cal.Rptr.2d 352, 8 P.3d 1089], internal citation omitted.)

  • “We do not suggest the covenant of good faith and fair dealing has no function whatever in the interpretation and enforcement of employment contracts. As indicated above, the covenant prevents a party from acting in bad faith to frustrate the contract’s actual benefits. Thus, for example, the covenant might be violated if termination of an at-will employee was a mere pretext to cheat the worker out of another contract benefit to which the employee was clearly entitled, such as compensation already earned.” (Guz, supra, 24 Cal.4th at p. 353, fn. 18.)
    • “The reason for an employee’s dismissal and whether that reason constitutes bad faith are evidentiary questions most properly resolved by the trier of fact.” (Luck

v. Southern Pacific Transportation Co. (1990) 218 Cal.App.3d 1, 26 [267 Cal.Rptr. 618], internal citations omitted.)

Secondary Sources

Chin et al., California Practice Guide: Employment Litigation, Ch. 4-D, Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing, ¶¶ 4:330, 4:331, 4:340, 4:343, 4:346 (The Rutter Group)

1 Wrongful Employment Termination Practice (Cont.Ed.Bar 2d ed.) Contract Actions, §§ 8.27–8.28

4 Wilcox, California Employment Law, Ch. 60, Liability for Wrongful Termination and Discipline, §§ 60.02[2][c], 60.06 (Matthew Bender)

21 California Forms of Pleading and Practice, Ch. 249, Employment Law: Termination and Discipline, § 249.14 (Matthew Bender) California Civil Practice: Employment Litigation §§ 6:21–6:22

Call 310-312-1100 Now to schedule a time to discuss your matter with Attorney John Michael Jensen.

Call Now