[QUOTE=Blackdog;1058800531]Actually, it's not. All that has to happen is for a statement in any employee documentation, such as the handbook or disciplinary forms, to contradict the "at will" umbrella law and she has a solid case. This only has to consist of statements or indications that performance will guarantee continued employment. Further, religious morality can NEVER be the reason that a person is fired from a job because it falls directly under the protection of religion as stated in the Civil Rights Act of 1964.It is a private institution, they can hire and fire who they will. The case law on this as I said is pretty much not in her favor. Even worse in Florida.
I agree with this but that is an assumption beyond what the article has stated as fact.
This was a wrongful termination let alone and technicality that dispels the "at will" agreement.
I am going on facts here, not assumptions.
I don't really think you do. You keep referencing the "at will" employment of Florida with zero admission of the fact that the "at will" agreement isn't air tight. And no one here is making any assumption (save for your assumption that "at will" trumps any other legal code); everything I have stated is pulled directly from the article.I know exactly what it means, you seem to be confused on the subject. I am based on facts, absolutely correct and have shown evidence to back this up. So far you have made assumptions based on things that may not even be a factor.