In a recent decision, the Arizona Court of Appeals delved into matters pertaining to the Arizona Employment Protection Act (AEPA), A.R.S. § 23-1501. Central to this judgement was the assessment of an employee claim alleging dismissal due to the disclosure of supposed unsafe conditions.
The particulars of the case called for a nuanced analysis of the notion of ‘protected activity’ under the AEPA. A detailed report on the matter by Perkins Coie offers a comprehensive breakdown of the judgement.
Delving into the specifics, the Court explored if each disclosure by the employee qualified as protected activity. This is crucial given that the AEPA explicitly demarcates certain forms of employee activity as protected, thereby safeguarding employees from retaliatory action by employers.
The Court found itself presiding over a key question: Could reported violations of the Arizona Administrative Code (AAC) constitute protected activity under the AEPA?
In its decision, the Court deemed the reported violation of the AAC as possibly constituting protected activity. This conclusion, however, was not extended to other reported infractions, including an alleged violation of state enforced rules.
This decision underscores the intricate nature of legality surrounding employee rights and the understanding of ‘protected activity’ within Arizona’s jurisdiction. Legal professionals must stand cognizant of such nuances when dealing with cases of employee rights and disputes.