This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
William Mitchell Law Review
Volume 16 | Issue 5 Article 2
1990
Working Backwards: The Covenant of Good Faithand Fair Dealing in Employment LawDeborah A. SchmedemannMitchell Hamline School of Law, [email protected]
Follow this and additional works at: http://open.mitchellhamline.edu/wmlr
Recommended CitationSchmedemann, Deborah A. (1990) "Working Backwards: The Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing in Employment Law,"William Mitchell Law Review: Vol. 16: Iss. 5, Article 2.Available at: http://open.mitchellhamline.edu/wmlr/vol16/iss5/2
William Mitchell College of LawMitchell Open Access
Faculty Scholarship
1990
Working Backwards: The Covenant of Good Faithand Fair Dealing in Employment LawDeborah SchmedemannWilliam Mitchell College of Law, [email protected]
Publication Information16 William Mitchell Law Review 1119 (1990)
This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Mitchell Open Access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Scholarship by anauthorized administrator of Mitchell Open Access.
Repository CitationSchmedemann, Deborah, "Working Backwards: The Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing in Employment Law" (1990). FacultyScholarship. Paper 37.http://open.wmitchell.edu/facsch/37
1
Schmedemann: Working Backwards: The Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing in
Working Backwards: The Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing inEmployment Law
AbstractThis article examines the covenant of good faith and fair dealing with respect to employment law. Thisdoctrine is at an interesting stage in its development (or decline) in Minnesota and elsewhere. The articlebegins with the standard exposition of the current state of the law; part I describes the limited scope of thecovenant and its limited force in Minnesota employment law. Part II contains my assessment of the courts'handling of the covenant and the promise this theory holds for Minnesota employees and employers. Mytheses are: First, the courts have thus far failed to develop a sound theory of the covenant of good faith and fairdealing because they have approached the problem backwards. Second, the real promise of the covenant--ifdefined to focus on faithfulness to the parties' bargain--is its potential to prompt employers to act in good faithnot only at the time of discharge, but also during the employment relationship.
KeywordsEmployment discharge, termination of employment, employee’s duty, terms of employment, Minnesotaemployees, bad faith, job security
DisciplinesContracts | Labor and Employment Law
This article is available at Mitchell Open Access: http://open.wmitchell.edu/facsch/37
2
William Mitchell Law Review, Vol. 16, Iss. 5 [1990], Art. 2