Opinion ID: 2353157
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Well Established and Clearly Mandated Public Policy

Text: It is well-settled that public policy is not found in the varying personal opinions and whims of judges or courts, charged with the interpretation and declaration of the established law, as to what they themselves believe to be the demands or interests of the public. In re Rahn's Estate, 316 Mo. 492, 501, 291 S.W. 120, 123 (Mo.1926). Therefore, a wrongful discharge action must be based on a constitutional provision, a statute, a regulation based on a statute or a rule promulgated by a governmental body. See Johnson v. McDonnell Douglas Corp., 745 S.W.2d 661, 663 (Mo. banc 1988). Absent such explicit authority, the wrongful discharge action fails as a matter of law. Id. Moreover, not every statute or regulation gives rise to an at-will wrongful termination action. See, e.g., Lay v. St. Louis Helicopter Airways, Inc., 869 S.W.2d 173 (Mo.App.1993). A vague or general statute, regulation, or rule cannot be successfully pled under the at-will wrongful termination theory, because it would force the court to decide on its own what public policy requires. See id. Such vagueness would also cause the duties imposed upon employers [to] become more vague and create difficulties for employers to plan around liability based on the vagaries of judges. Timothy Heinz, The Assault on the Employment at Will Doctrine, 48 Mo. L.Rev. 855, 876 (1983).