Opinion ID: 873325
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Pennsylvania Public Policy

Text: Wallett also argues that he was wrongfully discharged in violation of Pennsylvania public policy because his termination was caused by Defendants‟ alleged pay-to-play and influence peddling schemes. The general rule in Pennsylvania is that employment is atwill unless there is a statutory or contractual provision to the contrary. See Weaver v. Harpster, 975 A.2d 555, 556 (Pa. 2009). Pennsylvania courts have found an exception to at-will employment and permitted a common law cause of action for wrongful discharge only where the termination has “implicated a clear mandate of public policy.” Id. at 564; see also id. at 569 (“[W]e can only declare the public policy of this Commonwealth where it is „so obviously for or against public health, safety, morals, or welfare that there is virtual unanimity of opinion in regard to it.‟” (quoting Mamlin v. Genoe, 17 A.2d 407, 409 (Pa. 1941))). The District Court dismissed Wallett‟s public policy claim because it was reluctant to expand a very narrow exception to Pennsylvania‟s at-will employment doctrine in the absence of any Pennsylvania case law on point. See Wallett v. Pa. Turnpike Comm’n, No. 10-2092, 2011 WL 864405, at  (M.D. Pa. Mar. 10, 2011). Wallett argues that the Defendants‟ pay-to-play scheme violated the Commonwealth Procurement Code, which provides for honesty and integrity by government officials in the hiring of outside contractors. See 62 Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. § 2301, et seq. 10 We agree with the District Court that there is no clear mandate of public policy that has been violated here. We are not aware of any Pennsylvania case law in which violation of the Commonwealth Procurement Code provided the basis for an exception to the at-will employment doctrine. Additionally, even if there were a case on point, there is scant evidence in this record to support a finding that Defendants‟ conduct violated the Commonwealth Procurement Code. Therefore, we will affirm the District Court‟s dismissal of Wallett‟s public policy claim.