Employment & Labor Law
Please select a topic from the drop down list
Crouch v. Public Service Commission
2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 16871
In Crouch, the trial court issued a directed verdict in favor of the defendants on the plaintiff's whistle-blower claim. The trial court ruled that "Crouch's verbal complaints to his supervisory officials did not satisfy the requirements of the Whistle-blower's Act." Id.
The appeals court agreed. It reasoned that the statute clearly states the complaint fo the supervisor must be in writing. Because Crouch's complaint to his immediate supervisors was not in writing, he did not meet the statute.
In the alternative, Crouch argued that he was still protected under the statute because after he told his supervisors, the informed "the employee designated as agency inspector general, which does not have to be in writing." Crouch at 2.
Although Crouch was correct in that a complaint made to the Inspector General in the Executive office of the Governor or the employee designated as agency inspector general, does not have to be in writing, he is still not protected.
The court ruled that "Crouch did not ask his supervisors to submit the complaints on his behalf, and no promise was made by the supervisors that they would do so." Id.
Topic(s)
