In Guz v$.$ Bechtel National, where Guz sued for breach of an implied contract to be terminated only for good cause and for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing after he was fired by Bechtel National during a time of high profits, the supreme court held that Bechtel could:

Group of answer choices

fire Guz without reason because he had not worked for Bechtel for more than $25$ years

not fire Guz without reason because he had worked for them for over $20$ years

fire Guz without cause because there was insufficient evidence of an implied contract of continued employment

not fire Guz without cause because there was clear evidence of an implied contract of continued employment