A pharmacist worked at a drug store in Michigan. He experienced an armed robbery at the store. Not surprisingly, this made him more concerned about security at work. He asked the drug store (which was part of a large national chain) to take a number of steps to improve security (e.g., adding a panic-button device), but they declined to do so. The pharmacist then decided to complete the training and certification program needed to obtain a permit to lawfully carry a concealed weapon. He was issued a concealed pistol license and purchased a handgun. He began bringing the gun to work, concealed in his pocket. One evening two masked individuals with guns entered the drug store. The pharmacist tried to dial 911, but one of the men jumped over the count and pointed a gun at him The pharmacist said that he saw the man’s “finger jerking on the gun’s trigger.” The pharmacist backed away, pulled his gun out, and fired it multiple times. Amazingly, no one was shot or injured during this incident and the intruders fled. The pharmacist subsequently met with company officials who told him that he had violated the store’s “non-escalation” policy and would have to either resign or be terminated. The pharmacist refused to resign and was fired. He sued. Does he have a valid claim under the public policy exception to employment at will? Why or why not?