April 30, 2014. The Supreme Court is considering a hot-button issue in public employment law: What protection do public employees have when they expose public waste and corruption?
Edward Lane was employed as the head of a program for juvenile offenders out of a community college in Alabama. Mr. Lane’s internal audit revealed that a highly paid employee was a consistent no-show at work. Suzanne Schmitz was paid one of their top salaries despite the fact that she didn’t show up. She was also a state representative. Mr. Lane fired her, despite the warnings from his co-workers not to get involved. Ms. Schmitz was later convicted of fraud.
Usually, this is where the story would end: hundreds of thousands of public dollars saved, the good guy continues his work. Instead, the community college fired Mr. Lane just before it made its request for renewal funds from the state legislature for his program. Mr. Lane sued for retaliation for exercising his First Amendment right to free speech.
The Supreme Court narrowly defines what speech by public employees are a matter of public concern and therefore protected. In the past, the Court limited a public employee’s protected speech to statements made as a citizen discussing matters of public concern, rather than discussions as an employee. The State of Alabama is therefore arguing that Mr. Lane’s statements were not protected, because he was testifying about work-related information. The Supreme Court oral arguments were heard on Monday, April 28. Analysts expect a decision this summer.
To learn more about this case, visit the link HERE. For more information about employment law, contact the Goosmann Law Firm at info@goosmannlaw.com or call 712-226-4000.
Follow Emilee Boyle Gehling on Twitter @EmileeAtGLF!