According to a Connecticut appeals court, an employer can terminate an at-will employment relationship at any time—even before an employee's first day of work. Petitte v. DSL.net, Inc., AC27557 (Conn. Ct. App., July 10, 2007). Though this result may seem harsh to an employee who relies on a job offer to quit his current position and ends up jobless, the court determined that it would be illogical to rule otherwise.
In this case of first impression in Connecticut, defendant, DSL.net, Inc., offered Kevin Petitte a sales position with the company on December 8, 2003. That same day, the parties agreed that he would sign an offer letter. After the December 8th conversation, but before signing the offer letter, Mr. Petitte informed DSL.net that he would resign from his current position with another company in order to begin working for DSL.net on December 15, 2003. He signed the offer letter on December 10, 2003. The letter provided that the offer was contingent on Mr. Petitte's understanding that it was "not a guarantee of employment for any specified length of time by either party" and explained that his employment would be at-will, "which means that either you or the company can terminate your employment at any time for any reason, with or without cause."
After Mr. Petitte signed the offer letter, DSL.net asked him for a list of employment references. No one asked him for employment references prior to this time. When Mr. Petitte reported to work on December 15th, a DSL.net employee told him that the company had some concerns about hiring him, asked Mr. Petitte for additional references and sent him home for the day. Later that evening, Mr. Petitte was informed by telephone that DSL.net could not employ him. A few days later, Mr. Petitte received a letter rescinding the December 10th offer because of the information DSL.net collected from his references. Mr. Petitte subsequently filed a lawsuit against DSL.net.
In Connecticut, employers and employees have an at-will employment relationship unless there is a specific employment contract stating otherwise. As spelled out in Mr. Petitte's offer letter, this means that both employers and employees can terminate their employment at any time for any reason. Despite the clear-cut employment at-will doctrine, Mr. Petitte argued that there were two contracts at issue here—"one to employ and the other of employment." According to Mr. Petitte, although the employment at-will doctrine applied to the contract of employment, it did not apply to the contract to employ him. He argued that DSL.net breached the contract to employ him. Because he never had the opportunity to begin employment, he never became an at-will employee. The trial court rejected Mr. Petitte's argument. So did the Connecticut appeals court.
According to the appeals court, "the employment at will doctrine applies to all aspects of the employment relationship and is not conditioned on the prospective employee actually commencing employment." The court explained, "An employer who changes its mind about a prospective employee should not be required to allow the person to actually commence duties before ending the relationship." Guiding the court's decision were similar cases in Virginia and Oregon, where the courts ruled in the employers' favor. The court also found it significant that the December 10th letter explicitly stated that Mr. Petitte's employment was terminable at-will and that he admitted during his deposition that "he understood what he was getting into."
Mr. Petitte brought other claims against DSL.net, as well. The appeals court upheld the lower court's ruling and dismissed all of his claims. The court rejected Mr. Petitte's negligent misrepresentation claim, finding that the offer letter did not constitute negligent misrepresentation because it did not guarantee employment and stated that any employment relationship was at-will. In addition, the court did not find DSL.net's behavior to be "so outrageous in character, and so extreme in degree" as to constitute intentional infliction of emotional distress.
The message conveyed to employees in this case is strong—"[a]n individual leaving the employ of one entity for an at-will position with another should understand that he has no guarantee that he will be permitted to commence employment." While this decision undoubtedly is reassuring to employers, they should nonetheless take appropriate measures to avoid this situation and a likely lawsuit altogether. Whenever possible, references should be checked before extending an offer of employment. Employers also should be sure to include at-will language in offer letters—something the Connecticut court found significant in Petitte.
Copyright © Jackson Lewis. VenuLex resources are intended for informational purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice.
Legal Disclaimer
The information contained in this document is for general, informational purposes only and is not intended to be legal advice. This information is not a substitute for the guidance of a professional and should not be relied upon in reference to any specific situation without first seeking the advice of a qualified HR professional and/or legal counsel regarding applicable federal, state or local laws. HRTools, Insperity and their respective employees make no warranties, express or implied, and make no judgments regarding the accuracy of this content and/or its applicability to a specific situation. A reference or link to another website is not an endorsement of that site or service.