Michigan Whistleblower Law

Michigan adopted the Public Policy Exception, but limits it to matters not covered under its Whistleblower Protection Act, MI Comp L § 15.361–15.369 (general law). The WPA act covers reports of current or past violations of law.

Michigan was one of the first states to adopt the public policy exception.

In a 1976 decision the appeals court reasoned:

“It is apparently true that the employment relationship present in this case was an employment at will. And, while it is generally true that either party may terminate an employment at will for any reason or for no reason, that rule is not absolute. It is too well-settled to require citation that an employer at will may not suddenly terminate the employment of persons because of their sex, race, or religion. Likewise, the better view is that an employer at will is not free to discharge an employee when the reason for the discharge is an intention on the part of the employer to contravene the public policy of this state.” (See Sventko v. Kroger Company, 245 N.W.2d 151 (Mich. App. 1976))

Court Decisions:

• Suchodolski v. Michigan Consolidated Gas Company, 316 N.W.2d 710 (Mich. 1982);
• Pace v. Edel-Harrelson, Supreme Court Docket No. 151374 (Mich. 2016) 
• Dudewicz v. Norris-Schmid, Inc., 503 N.W.2d 645 (Mich. 1993) (common law claims covered under Michigan’s whistleblower law are preempted) (overruled in part by Brown v. Mayor of Detroit, 2007) 
• Kimmelman v. Heather Downs, 753 N.W.2d 265 (Mich. App. 2008) (claim barred under Michigan WPA’s ninety-day statute of limitations) 
• Sventko v. Kroger Company, 245 N.W.2d 151 (Mich. App. 1976)
  

Statutes:

• Whistleblower Protection Act, MI Comp L § 15.361–15.369 (general law) 
• MI Comp L § 333.16244 (public health)