¶ … legal issues presented by the firing of Uriah may appear to be simple but, in reality, the issues are complex and contingent on a variety of factors. The first factor is whether or not Uriah was employed under a contract with the City. If not, a determination as to the legality of his firing must be addressed in a different manner. Regardless, of whether or not there is a contract, Uriah is still entitled to due process under existing case law regarding the hiring and firing of public employees (Skelley v. State Personnel Board, 1975). Finally, it must be determined whether Uriah's actions as an exotic dancer rise to the level of violating some form of formal or informal moral clause, either contractually or implied as a condition of his employment.
Plaintiff's Arguments
The framework of Uriah's arguments must be based upon two factors. First, he must argue strongly that as a public employee he is entitled to Due Process under the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution (Dowling-Sendor, 2005). His employment with the City of Boca Grande is a property interest and, therefore, subject to Due Process protections. This means that before the government, which in this case is Uriah's employer, can deny him property interest it must provide him with notice of the charges against him and the opportunity to present his side of the issue. As it appears that Uriah was fired summarily he was never afforded the opportunity to defend his
The second argument that Uriah might offer is that the City's actions also impinged upon his liberty interests as well. Uriah could argue that the City, by firing him on the basis of his exotic dancing activities, has had the practical effect of impugning his reputation or stigmatizing him to the affect that his ability to procure future employment was endangered. Uriah can argue he has the right to work and earn a living and the actions of the City have potentially endangered this right. Finally, Uriah must
attack the very
nature of the reasons for his dismissal. Absent a clear contract provision detailing what constitutes "activities that could discredit the City" Uriah's argument must be that his employment on weekends as an exotic dancer did not in any way discredit the City and that, in fact, his employment had no effect (Papandrea, 2010).
Defendant's Arguments
The City's arguments must begin with its contention that Uriah's activities as an exotic dancer constituted a "discredit to the City." Nothing else presented in the fact pattern indicates that there was any other basis for Uriah's dismissal. As a seven-year employee with a good work record Uriah would have been expected to enjoy continued employment but if indeed it can be demonstrated that Uriah's activities brought "discredit" to the City his prior work record would have little bearing on the decision to fire him. The City must argue that Uriah as an employee of the City has a
duty to represent the City and not to engage in any behaviors that reflect negatively upon the City or…
