The Iowa Civil Rights Act prohibits firing an employee in retaliation for opposing a discriminatory practice. The plaintiff in this case was fired not for opposing any such prohibited, discriminatory employment practice by the defendant company.

Rather, he was terminated for voicing his opposition to the termination of a second employee, who had been previously fired for testifying against the employer’s position in a discrimination case.

While the plaintiff concedes that he does not have a direct cause of action for retaliatory discharge under the Iowa antidiscrimination statute, he contends that he should have a wrongful discharge claim for violation of a clear mandate of public policy based upon the intent of the legislature as implied by the antiretaliatory provision of that statute. What do you think? See Fitzgerald v.

Salsbury Chemical, Inc. [No. 52/98-1492 (Iowa Supreme 2000)].