|
3873 REVIEW DENIED Unless an employer establishes that conduct for which an employee was terminated is part of concerted action with other employees based on their consent to the conduct, the employee's action for wrongful termination is not pre-empted by the National Labor Relations Act; an employee's claim that he was terminated for exposing the employer's fraudulent billing practices does not require interpretation of a collective bargaining agreement and is not pre-empted by the federal Labor Management Relations ActCitationHANEY v ARAMARK (Fraudulent Billing) 121 CA4 623 [See: 29 USC 151 etseq, 29 USC 185; CivC 1572, 1709, 1710; PenC 484, 536; Haney v Aramark (RehrgGrtd) 120 Cal.App.4th 609, T/AT 8/04; SD Unions v Garmon 359 US 236; Sears v Carpenters 436 US 180; Allis-Chalmers v Lueck 471 US 202; DFEH v Verizon 108 Cal.App.4th 160 T/AT 6/03]
|
|
