A thorny issue for employers is how to handle situations involving employees who are affected by domestic abuse. A recent case from the Washington State Supreme Court answered the question: “Has the State of Washington established a clear mandate of public policy of protecting domestic violence survivors and their families and holding their abusers accountable?” The court responded in the affirmative, saying: “This policy is manifested in numerous legislative, judicial, constitutional, and executive expressions of public policy.” Danny v. Laidlaw Transit Servs. Inc., 193 P.3d 128 (Wash. Oct. 3, 2008) http://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/784213.opn.pdf

The situation in this case involved severe violence by a husband toward the employee and their five children. Among other things, she was forced to move out of the house; to care for a child who was beaten so badly he had to be hospitalized; to move her children to a shelter; to confer with police about protection; and to assist in the prosecution or her husband. Some of these events meant that the employee needed time off work. As a result, she was demoted and eventually terminated.

The court found a public policy of preventing domestic violence was clearly established in the State’s legislative enactments: “The tort serves to safeguard that important public policy by allowing employees to do what they must to prevent domestic violence, without fear of losing their economic independence.” The court also stated that it was mindful of the employer’s burden and stated: “Finally, we note that statistics suggest that it is in an employer’s best interest to work with employees experiencing domestic violence and that such work will ultimately result in a stronger and more stable workforce.” The court then returned the case to the federal district court for further proceedings. There were also concurring and dissenting opinions which raised concerns about the burden placed on employers, among other issues.