By Eric Parzianello

A recent Newsweek article noted that there has been a 17 percent jump in the number of age-discrimination complaints filed since the recession began in 2007. Wrongful discharge cases, in general, appear to also be on the rise. Many have no merit, as evidenced by a recent Michigan Court of Appeals case involving alleged religious discrimination against a resident of Muslim faith.

Employers need to take note of the significance of an agreement that expressly provides for employment at-will. There could be a significant impact on your business that you may not be aware of.

As an example; after being terminated from his employment by a joint venture between Lear Corporation and Comer Holdings, Yussef Johnson sued the joint venture and Comer for breach of contract and religious discrimination under the Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act based upon Johnson's Muslim religion.

Johnson testified that the owner of Comer promised him in an interview that he would only be terminated "for cause." However, it was undisputed that after his interview, he signed a letter offer and an employment application which both stated that the employment relationship was terminable at the will of either party. Under Michigan law, an employee cannot rely on a prior oral agreement for just-cause employment where he later signs an agreement that expressly provides for employment at-will, the trial court properly dismissed the breach of contract claim.

As to the claim that he was subjected to religious discrimination because he was a Muslim, Johnson was required to establish that he was discharged or otherwise discriminated against with respect "to employment, compensation, or a term, condition, or privilege of employment, because of religion . . . ." In one of the incidents Johnson cited as proof that the firing decision was motivated by a religious bias, when a supervisor told Johnson that he was going to have a "come to Jesus" meeting with Johnson shortly before his termination.

The Michigan Court of Appeals patiently explained in its decision that a "come to Jesus meeting" is a commonly used phrase which refers "to a meeting where someone intends to lecture another person about some improper behavior and ask them to "shape up or ship out"; it can also refer to "dressing someone down" or calling him or her "on the carpet."

The Court then concluded that no reasonable jury could find that the statement or the other alleged incidents reflected a bias on Harris' part either in favor of Christians or against Muslims and affirmed the dismissal of Johnson's case.

Despite the victory for the employer in this case regarding the religious comment, owners would be well advised to have their management team trained in basic discrimination laws. By doing so, you will be further protecting your business interests and assets.