"Finally, as to his cause of action for tortious breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, we hold that tort remedies are not available for breach of the implied covenant in an employment contract to employees who allege they have been discharged in violation of the covenant."

"Nor can we sustain the award as damages for wrongful discharge, as Shaw suggests. First, wrongful discharge is a tort, and "tort remedies are not available for breach of the implied covenant in an employment contract to employees who allege they have been discharged in violation of the covenant. (Citing Foley v. Interactive Data Corp (1988) 47 Cal.3d 654, 700)"

(1) violates a Constitutionally-protected right (i.e. discrimination against a protected class), or a Federal or California statute or regulation; or

(2) violates the express terms of a written employment contract.

As for a written employment contract, California Labor Code Section 2922 states:

Section 2922: "An employment, having no specified term, may be terminated at the will of either party on notice to the other. Employment for a specified term means an employment for a period greater than one month."

Section 2922 provides a presumption of employment at will, terminable at any time by either party upon notice. Absent a contract overcoming this presumption, "the employee can be fired with or without good cause." (Foley v. Interactive Data Corp. (1988) 47 Cal.3d 654, 665.) The employer's right to discharge at-will employees is, however, limited by public policy. (Ibid.) Although an at-will employee may be discharged "for no reason, or for an arbitrary or irrational reason, there can be no right to terminate for an unlawful reason or a purpose that contravenes fundamental public policy." (Gantt v. Sentry Insurance (1992) 1 Cal.4th 1083, 1094 [overruled in part on other grounds by Green v. Ralee Engineering Co. (1998) 19 Cal.4th 66, 80, fn. 6 (Green)].) When an employee is discharged in violation of "fundamental principles of public policy," the employee "may maintain a tort action and recover damages traditionally available in such actions." (Tameny v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (1980) 27 Cal.3d 167, 170.) The court has recognized four sources of public policy to support such claims: "the employee (1) refused to violate a statute; (2) performed a statutory obligation; (3) exercised a constitutional or statutory right or privilege; or (4) reported a statutory violation for the public's benefit." (Green, supra, 19 Cal.4th at p. 76.)

In summary, firing an employee for unfair reasons or for no reason is permitted, so long as the employer does not break the law or breach a written employment contract when taking such action.

On the other hand, an employer who violates a Constitutionally protected right, violates a Federal or California statute, or retaliates against an employee who seeks the protection of such rights or statutes, can be sued. Some examples of "public policy" violations include:

Discriminating against the employee because of race, national origin, sex, pregnancy, age, religion, sexual orientation/preference or marital status

Sexual harassment, or racial harassment

Firing or retaliating against the employee because the employee refused to violate a law, regulation or statute

Firing or retailating against the employee because the employee complains about what he/she reasonably perceives - as a violation of the law. This includes such things as discrimination being committed against the employee or fellow employees, failure to pay wages, failure to pay overtime, workplace safety issues or a workers compensation claim

Firing or retaliating against the employee who complains, files a claim, or gives testimony regarding discrimination based on race, national origin, sex, pregnancy, age, religion, sexual orientation/preference or marital status

Firing or retaliating against the employee because the employee complained about sexual harassment or racial harassment

Firing or retaliating against the employee because the employee sought a reasonable accommodation for a disability

Firing or retaliating against the employee for taking lawful medical leave, pregnancy leave, or or family leave to care for a sick parent or child

Firing or retaliating against the employee for complaining about wage violations