Multiple Choice
1. Employment-at–will:
a. allows employees to quit their jobs for any reason at any time
b. allows employers to discharge employees for any reason at any time subject to contract obligations
c. has been restricted by the courts or legislatures in some states that recognize some public policy limitations
on the employer’s right to fire an employee
d. allows employees to quit their jobs for any reason at any time and allows employers to discharge employees
for any reason at any time subject to contract obligations
e. allows employees to quit their jobs for any reason at any time and allows employers to discharge employees
for any reason at any time subject to contract obligations and allows employees to quit their jobs for any
reason at any time and allows employers to discharge employees for any reason at any time subject to
contract obligations
2. Employment-at–will:
a. allows employees to quit their jobs with two weeks’ notice, unless otherwise restricted
b. allows employers to discharge employees for any reason at any time subject to contract obligations
c. has been restricted by legislatures in some states that recognize some public policy limitations on the
employer‘s right to fire an employee
d. allows employers to discharge employees for any reason at any time subject to contract obligations and has
been restricted by legislatures in some states that recognize some public policy limitations on the employer’s
right to fire an employee
e. allows employees to quit their jobs with two weeks’ notice, unless otherwise restricted and allows employers
to discharge employees for any reason at any time subject to contract obligations and has been restricted by
legislatures in some states that recognize some public policy limitations on the employer‘s right to fire an
employee
3. Besides contractual agreements that place limits on the employment relationship, there are
over the years.
a. public policy exceptions
b. common law exceptions
c. Supreme Court exceptions
d. verbal exceptions
e. none of the other choices are correct
that have arisen
4. In addition to the contractual agreements that place limits on employment relationships, there are public policy
exceptions that come from:
a. statutes
b. application of common law rules
c. both statutes and application of common law rules
d. ancient Greek law
e. early British and French law
5. Exceptions to the presumption of at–will employment come from:
a. courts
b. legislation
c. both courts and legislation
d. the Vice President
e. the Chamber of Commerce
6. Which of the following are public–policy exceptions recognized by most states as limits to the employment-at-will
doctrine allowing termination of employees?
a. refusing to commit an illegal act
b. performing a public duty (reporting for jury duty)
c. exercising a right (filing for workers’ compensation)
d. refusing to commit an illegal act and performing a public duty (reporting for jury duty)
e. refusing to commit an illegal act and performing a public duty (reporting for jury duty) and exercising a right
(filing for workers’ compensation)
7. Which of the following are public–policy exceptions recognized by most states as limits to the employment-at-will
doctrine allowing termination of employees?
a. calling authorities to report suspicious activities at the place of employment
b. performing a public duty (reporting for jury duty)
c. exercising a right (filing for workers’ compensation)
d. performing a public duty (reporting for jury duty) and exercising a right (filing for workers’ compensation)
e. calling authorities to report suspicious activities at the place of employment and performing a public duty
(reporting for jury duty) and exercising a right (filing for workers’ compensation)
8. Which of the following are public–policy exceptions recognized by most states as limits to the employment-at-will
doctrine allowing termination of employees?
a. refusing to commit an illegal act
b. performing a public duty (reporting for jury duty)
c. exercising freedom of speech rights
d. refusing to commit and illegal act and performing a public duty (reporting for jury duty)
e. refusing to commit and illegal act and performing a public duty (reporting for jury duty) and exercising
freedom of speech rights
9. Which of the following is not an exception to the employment-at-will doctrine, for which workers may not be fired,
at least in some states:
a. refusing to commit an illegal act
b. performing an important public duty, such as jury duty
c. disloyalty toward the public image of the employer
d. exercising a public right, such as applying for compensation benefits
e. none of the other choices
10. Which of the following is unlikely to be classified as a public policy exception to employment at will should an
employee be fired:
a. filing for bankruptcy
b. reporting for jury duty
c. refusing to sign a false statement by an employer for a government report
d. filing a workers’ compensation claim against the employer
e. all of the other choices would be classified as public policy exceptions
11. Which of the following is not an example of a public policy exception to employment at will:
a. agreeing to commit an illegal act
b. refusing to perform an important public duty, such as jury duty
c. disloyalty toward the public image of the employer
d. deciding not to exercise a public right, such as applying for compensation benefits
e. all of the other choices are correct
12. When an employer fires an employee in violation of a public policy exception to the presumption of at-will
employment, the employee may sue for:
a. defamation
b. misrepresentation
c. wrongful discharge
d. tortuous employment
e. none of the other choices
13. When an employer fires an employee in violation of a public policy exception to the presumption of at-will
employment, the employee may sue for:
a. defamation
b. misrepresentation
c. false firing
d. tortuous employment
e. none of the other choices
14. When an employee reports an employer‘s illegal act it is referred to as:
a. defamation
b. whistle blowing
c. tattle–tailing
d. whistle calling
e. horn blowing
15. When an employee reports an employer‘s illegal act it is referred to as:
a. defamation
b. horn blowing
c. tattle–tailing
d. whistle calling
e. none of the other choices are correct
16. Under the whistle-blower exception to the general rule of employers having the right to dismiss employees:
a. private employers do not have the right to fire employees who report possible violations of the law by their
employer
b. private employers do not have the right to fire employees who report legal problems that are found to be
actual violations of the law once investigated
c. private employers are less likely to be subject to whistle-blower exceptions than are public sector employers
d. whistle blowers do not have any rights against an employer, but have the right to compensation from a
special fund that rewards whistle blowing
e. none of the other choices
17. The whistle blower exception to at will employment is most likely to apply to:
a. private sector employees
b. public sector employees
c. private and public sector employees equally
d. small business owners
e. none of the other choices are correct
18. An employee who reports an employer’s illegal action in order to expose unsafe conditions is to be protected
by the whistle blower exception than an employee who reports an employer’s illegal action for private gain.
a. less likely
b. more likely
c. just as likely
d. more likely in southern states, but less likely in northern states
e. none of the other choices are correct
19. An employee who reports an employer’s illegal action in order to help law enforcement is to be protected by
the whistle blower exception than an employee who reports an employer’s illegal action for private gain.
a. less likely
b. more likely
c. just as likely
d. more likely in southern states, but less likely in northern states
e. none of the other choices are correct
20. An employee who reports an employer’s illegal for private gain is to be protected by the whistle blower
exception than an employee who reports an employer‘s illegal action in order to expose unsafe conditions.
a. less likely
b. more likely
c. just as likely
d. more likely in southern states, but less likely in northern states
e. none of the other choices are correct
21. Wrongful discharge is a:
a. felony
b. minor misdemeanor
c. major misdemeanor
d. tort
e. civil crime
22. Wrongful discharge is a:
a. felony
b. minor misdemeanor
c. major misdemeanor
d. civil crime
e. none of the other choices are correct
23. In Ballalatak v. All Iowa Agriculture Association, where Ballalatak contended that he was fired for inquiring into
whether the company was fulfilling its workers’ compensation obligation and the general manager claimed he was
fired for insubordination, the Iowa state supreme court held that Ballalatak:
a. could not sue for wrongful discharge because he was not fired on the same day that he made the inquiry
about the injured workers‘ compensation
b. should have been awarded damages of up to $10,000 for wrongful discharge
c. could not sue for wrongful discharge because Iowa law does not protect an employee who advocates
internally for another employee’s workers’ compensation claims
d. could sue for wrongful discharge because Iowa law protects an employee who advocates internally for
another employee’s workers’ compensation claims
e. none of the other choices are correct
24. In Ballalatak v. All Iowa Agriculture Association, where Ballalatak contended that he was fired for inquiring into
whether the company was fulfilling its workers’ compensation obligation and the general manager claimed he was
fired for insubordination, the Iowa state supreme court held that Ballalatak:
a. could not sue for wrongful discharge because he was not fired on the same day that he made the inquiry
about the injured workers‘ compensation
b. should have been awarded damages of up to $10,000 for wrongful discharge
c. could sue for wrongful discharge because Iowa law protects an employee who advocates internally for
another employee’s workers’ compensation claims
d. could sue for breach of his rights as a manager to ensure proper compliance with state law inside the
company
e. none of the other choices are correct
25. In varying degrees across the states, the courts do not look with favor on certain contracts that at times are made
part of the employment arrangement, which of the following is in that category:
a. noncompete agreements
b. anti-raiding covenants
c. exculpatory agreements
d. none of the other choices are restricted in employment
e. all of the other specific choices may be restricted in employment
26. In varying degrees across the states, the courts do not look with favor on certain contracts that at times are made
part of the employment arrangement, which of the following is not in that category:
a. noncompete agreements
b. substance abuse agreements
c. exculpatory agreements
d. anti-raiding covenants
e. all of the other specific choices may be restricted in employment
27. Employees may be required to sign, as a condition of employment, an agreement that they will not sue the employer
in case they are injured on the job. This is called:
a. noncompete agreement
b. anti-raiding covenant
c. exculpatory agreement
d. whistle-blower agreement
e. none of the other choices
28. A(n)
event.
is one in which one party promises not to sue another in case of an injury caused by a tort or some other
a. noncompete agreement
b. anti-raiding covenant
c. exculpatory agreement
d. whistle-blower agreement
e. none of the other choices
29. A(n)
event.
is one in which one party promises not to sue another in case of an injury caused by a tort or some other
a. noncompete agreement
b. anti-raiding covenant
c. no blame agreement
d. whistle-blower agreement
e. none of the other choices
30. An exculpatory agreement is one in which:
a. one party promises not to sue another in case of an injury caused by a tort or some other event
b. an employee agrees not to leave and go into competition against the employer or go to work for a competitor
for a certain time
c. an employee agrees not to recruit fellow employees for another company when they leave their current
place of employment
d. an employee agrees not to use illegal substances
e. none of the other choices are correct
31. An exculpatory agreement is one in which:
a. one party can sue another in case of an injury caused by a tort or some other event
b. an employee agrees not to leave and go into competition against the employer or go to work for a competitor
for a certain time
c. an employee agrees not to recruit fellow employees for another company when they leave their current
place of employment
d. an employee agrees not to use illegal substances
e. none of the other choices are correct
32. Employees may be required to sign, as a condition of employment, an agreement that they will not leave the
company and go to work for themselves or a competitor firm in a position that could inflict competitive injury on the
employer. This is called:
a. noncompete agreement
b. anti-raiding covenant
c. exculpatory agreement
d. whistle-blower agreement
e. none of the other choices
33. Employees may be required to sign, as a condition of employment, an agreement that they will not leave the
company and go to work for themselves or a competitor firm in a position that could inflict competitive injury on the
employer. This is called:
a. whistle-blower clause
b. anti-raiding covenant
c. exculpatory agreement
d. retaliatory employment agreement
e. none of the other choices
34. A(n) is one in which employees agree not to leave and go into competition against the employer or go to work
for a competitor for a certain time.
a. noncompete agreement
b. anti-raiding covenant
c. exculpatory agreement
d. whistle-blower agreement
e. none of the other choices
35. A(n) is one in which employees agree not to leave and go into competition against the employer or go to work
for a competitor for a certain time.
a. anti–competition pledge
b. anti-raiding covenant
c. exculpatory agreement
d. whistle-blower agreement
e. none of the other choices
36. A noncompete agreement is one in which:
a. one party promises not to sue another in case of an injury caused by a tort or some other event
b. an employee agrees not to leave and then go into competition against the employer or go to work for a
competitor for a certain time
c. an employee agrees not to recruit fellow employees for another company when they leave their current
place of employment
d. an employee agrees not to use illegal substances
e. none of the other choices are correct
37. A noncompete agreement is one in which:
a. one party promises not to sue another in case of an injury caused by a tort or some other event
b. an employee can leave and then go into competition against the employer or go to work for a competitor
without any waiting period
c. an employee agrees not to recruit fellow employees for another company when they leave their current
place of employment
d. an employee agrees not to use illegal substances
e. none of the other choices are correct
38. In Zambelli Fireworks Manufacturing Co. v. Wood, where Zambelli sued Wood for violating the noncompete
agreement in his contract, the appeals court held that:
a. the noncompete agreement was void because it violated common law policies
b. the noncompete agreement was void because it violated public policy
c. Wood‘s specialized knowledge from working at Zambelli, but not customer goodwill, constituted a legitimate
business interest that Zambelli had a right to protect through a reasonable restrictive covenant
d. Wood’s specialized knowledge from working at Zambelli in addition to customer goodwill constituted
legitimate business interests that Zambelli had a right to protect through a reasonable restrictive covenant
e. Wood‘s specialized knowledge from working at Zambelli and established customer goodwill did not constitute
legitimate business interests that Zambelli had a right to protect through a reasonable restrictive covenant
39. In Zambelli Fireworks Manufacturing Co. v. Wood, where Zambelli sued Wood for violating the noncompete
agreement in his contract, the appeals court held that:
a. the noncompete agreement was void because it violated common law policies
b. the noncompete agreement was void because it violated public policy
c. Wood‘s specialized knowledge from working at Zambelli, but not customer goodwill, constituted a legitimate
business interest that Zambelli had a right to protect through a reasonable restrictive covenant
d. Wood’s specialized knowledge from working at Zambelli and established customer goodwill did not constitute
legitimate business interests that Zambelli had a right to protect through a reasonable restrictive covenant
e. none of the other choices are correct
40. Employees may be required to sign, as a condition of employment, an agreement that they will not recruit fellow
employees for another company if they leave for another place of employment. This is called:
a. noncompete agreement
b. anti-raiding covenant
c. exculpatory agreement
d. whistle-blower agreement
e. none of the other choices
41. Employees may be required to sign, as a condition of employment, an agreement that they will not recruit fellow
employees for another company if they leave for another place of employment. This is called:
a. noncompete agreement
b. retaliatory employment agreement
c. exculpatory agreement
d. whistle-blower agreement
e. none of the other choices
42. A(n) is one in which employees are required to sign, as a condition of employment, an agreement that they
will not recruit fellow employees for another company when they leave their current place of employment.
a. noncompete agreement
b. anti-raiding covenant
c. exculpatory agreement
d. whistle-blower agreement
e. none of the other choices
43. A(n) is one in which employees are required to sign, as a condition of employment, an agreement that they
will not recruit fellow employees for another company when they leave their current place of employment.
a. noncompete agreement
b. retaliatory employment agreement
c. exculpatory agreement
d. whistle-blower agreement
e. none of the other choices
44. An anti-raiding covenant is one in which:
a. one party promises not to sue another in case of an injury caused by a tort or some other event
b. an employee agrees not to leave and go into competition against the employer or go to work for a competitor
for a certain time
c. an employee agrees not to recruit fellow employees for another company when they leave their current
place of employment
d. an employee agrees not to use illegal substances
e. none of the other choices are correct
45. An anti-raiding covenant is one in which:
a. one party promises not to sue another in case of an injury caused by a tort or some other event
b. an employee agrees not to leave and go into competition against the employer or go to work for a competitor
for a certain time
c. an employee agrees to recruit fellow employees for another company when they leave their current place of
employment
d. an employee agrees not to use illegal substances
e. none of the other choices are correct
46. Anti–raiding covenants are:
a. illegal in all states
b. enforced by all states
c. held to be a violation of public policy in all states
d. held to be a violation of public policy in some states and enforced in others
e. unenforceable in Texas and California
47. Anti–raiding covenants are:
a. illegal in all states
b. enforced by all states
c. held to be a violation of public policy in all states
d. unenforceable in Texas and California
e. none of the other choices are correct