Fired for Refusing On-the-Job Adultery: A New Tort

A business owner—also a married man— demanded that a female employee have sex with him. Nothing new here. She refused on grounds that she would aid and abet adultery. That’s a little unusual. In the more common case, the subordinate alleges quid pro quo sexual harassment—and wins, if there is proof. But often, the remedy is reinstatement and lost wages. In this new case, the subordinate claimed that Virginia’s public policies on marriage are so paramount that a private employer cannot fire an employee for refusing to aid and abet adultery. A Virginia federal court has now ruled that state law recognizes a “public policy tort for wrongful discharge” that applies to this situation. What’s the difference between this tort case (civil wrong) and the more typical case involving a sexual harassment claim? In a word: Money. Tort damages can include a punitive element, to make an example of a bad actor. In Virginia, where religious values run deep, this might be costly for the spurned employer.