RETALIATION DEMAND LETTER

Oregon Whistleblower Law and Anti-Retaliation Claims

[ATTORNEY/FIRM LETTERHEAD]

[Firm Name]
[Address Line 1]
[City, Oregon ZIP]
Tel: [Phone Number]
Fax: [Fax Number]
[Attorney Email]
[Oregon State Bar Number]

VIA CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
AND VIA EMAIL TO: [recipient_email]

[Date]

[Employer Contact Name]
[Title]
[Company Legal Name]
[Company Address]
[City, State ZIP]

Copy to:
[General Counsel]
[EPLI Carrier, if known]

Re: Unlawful Retaliation Against [Client Full Name]
BOLI Case No.: [XXXXX] (if applicable)
EEOC Charge No.: [XXX-XXXX-XXXXX] (if applicable)
CONFIDENTIAL SETTLEMENT COMMUNICATION PURSUANT TO OEC 408

Dear [Mr./Ms./Mx. Last Name]:

This firm represents [Client Full Name] ("our client") in connection with claims of unlawful retaliation against [Company Legal Name] ("[Company Short Name]" or "the Company"). Please direct all future communications regarding this matter to our office.

Our client engaged in legally protected activity by [briefly describe protected activity], and [Company Short Name] retaliated by [briefly describe adverse action]. This retaliation violates Oregon law and exposes the Company to substantial liability for compensatory damages, punitive damages, and attorney's fees.

We write to demand immediate resolution of this matter and to advise that we are prepared to file suit if a satisfactory response is not received.

I. OREGON-SPECIFIC LEGAL FRAMEWORK

A. Oregon Whistleblower Law

Oregon provides comprehensive statutory protection for employees who report or refuse to participate in illegal activity.

Or. Rev. Stat. Section 659A.199 - Whistleblower Protection:

It is an unlawful employment practice for an employer to discharge, demote, suspend, or in any manner discriminate or retaliate against an employee with regard to promotion, compensation, or other terms, conditions, or privileges of employment for the reason that the employee has in good faith:

1. Reported criminal activity by any person;
2. Reported information that the employee believes is evidence of a violation of a state or federal law, rule, or regulation;
3. Reported to a health care regulatory board information about the care of a patient that the employee believes constitutes a violation of state or federal law;
4. Caused the information to be reported; or
5. Refused to violate state or federal law.

Or. Rev. Stat. Section 659A.203 - Additional Whistleblower Protections:

Protects employees who report violations of a state or federal law, rule, or regulation to the employer.

Statute of Limitations: Two (2) years from the date of the violation. Or. Rev. Stat. Section 659A.875.

Remedies:
- Reinstatement
- Back pay
- Compensatory damages
- Punitive damages
- Attorney's fees and costs
- Equitable relief

B. Oregon Civil Rights Laws

Oregon's civil rights laws, codified in Or. Rev. Stat. Chapter 659A, provide comprehensive protection against discrimination and retaliation.

Anti-Retaliation Provision: Or. Rev. Stat. Section 659A.030 makes it an unlawful employment practice to discriminate against a person because that person has opposed any unlawful practice, filed a complaint, testified, assisted, or participated in any proceeding under the civil rights laws.

Protected Classes Under Oregon Law:
- Race
- Color
- Religion
- Sex
- Sexual orientation
- Gender identity
- National origin
- Marital status
- Age (18+)
- Disability
- Expunged juvenile record
- Injured worker status

Administrative Exhaustion: A complaint may be filed with the Bureau of Labor and Industries (BOLI) within one (1) year of the alleged violation. Or. Rev. Stat. Section 659A.820.

Alternative Filing: For some claims, an employee may file directly in court within five (5) years without first filing with BOLI. Or. Rev. Stat. Section 659A.875.

Remedies under Or. Rev. Stat. Section 659A.885:
- Back pay
- Compensatory damages (no cap)
- Punitive damages (no cap)
- Attorney's fees and costs
- Equitable relief

C. Oregon Common Law Wrongful Discharge

Oregon recognizes a common law cause of action for wrongful discharge in violation of public policy.

Key Case Law:
- Nees v. Hocks, 272 Or. 210 (1975) (seminal case recognizing public policy exception)
- Delaney v. Taco Time Int'l, Inc., 297 Or. 10 (1984) (refusal to sign false affidavit)
- Babick v. Or. Arena Corp., 333 Or. 401 (2002) (discussing scope of public policy claims)

Elements:
1. Discharge in violation of a public policy
2. The public policy must be one of "important public interest"
3. The discharge must have been motivated by the employee's action that furthered the public policy

Statute of Limitations: Generally two (2) years for tort claims. Or. Rev. Stat. Section 12.110.

D. Specific Whistleblower Protections

Oregon provides additional protections in specific contexts:

1. Healthcare Workers: Or. Rev. Stat. Section 441.169 (nursing facility whistleblower protection)

2. Public Employees: Or. Rev. Stat. Section 659A.200-659A.224 (comprehensive public employee whistleblower protections)

3. Safety Reporting: Or. Rev. Stat. Section 654.062 (protection for reporting safety violations)

4. Environmental Reporting: Various environmental statutes include anti-retaliation provisions

II. NATURE OF THE PROTECTED ACTIVITY

Our client engaged in one or more forms of protected activity that triggered [Company Short Name]'s unlawful retaliation:

A. Type of Protected Activity

[Check all that apply]

Reporting Criminal Activity (Or. Rev. Stat. Section 659A.199)
- [ ] Reported criminal activity by any person in good faith
- [ ] Caused criminal activity to be reported

Reporting Violations of Law (Or. Rev. Stat. Section 659A.199)
- [ ] Reported information believed to be evidence of violation of state law
- [ ] Reported information believed to be evidence of violation of federal law
- [ ] Reported information believed to be evidence of violation of rule or regulation
- [ ] Reported violations to the employer

Healthcare Reporting (Or. Rev. Stat. Section 659A.199)
- [ ] Reported patient care information to a health care regulatory board
- [ ] Reported violations of patient care standards

Refusal to Violate Law (Or. Rev. Stat. Section 659A.199)
- [ ] Refused to violate state law
- [ ] Refused to violate federal law
- [ ] Refused to participate in illegal activity

Opposition to Discrimination/Harassment (Or. Rev. Stat. Section 659A.030)
- [ ] Complained internally about discrimination based on [race / color / religion / sex / sexual orientation / gender identity / national origin / marital status / age / disability]
- [ ] Complained internally about harassment or hostile work environment
- [ ] Reported discrimination or harassment to human resources

Participation in Discrimination Proceedings (Or. Rev. Stat. Section 659A.030)
- [ ] Filed a complaint with BOLI or EEOC
- [ ] Participated in a BOLI investigation
- [ ] Testified or provided information in a discrimination proceeding
- [ ] Served as a witness in a co-worker's case

Other Protected Activity
- [ ] Filed a workers' compensation claim
- [ ] Reported workplace safety violations to OR-OSHA
- [ ] Engaged in concerted activity protected by the NLRA
- [ ] [Other: describe]

B. Timeline of Protected Activity

C. Detailed Narrative

On [Date], our client [describe the protected activity in detail]:

[Provide comprehensive narrative including:
- What our client observed, learned, or experienced that prompted the protected activity
- The specific concerns raised or actions taken
- To whom the concerns were raised (names, titles)
- The manner of reporting (verbal, written, formal complaint)
- Any response received from management or HR
- Any instructions given to our client regarding the matter
- Any witnesses to the protected activity]

Our client's [complaint / report / testimony / action] was made in good faith and based on a reasonable belief that [the conduct complained of was unlawful / the information reported was accurate / the activity opposed was illegal].

III. THE RETALIATORY CONDUCT

A. Adverse Employment Actions

Following our client's protected activity, [Company Short Name] subjected [him/her/them] to the following retaliatory adverse employment actions:

[Check all applicable actions and provide details]

Termination/Constructive Discharge
- [ ] Our client was terminated on [Date]
- [ ] Our client was forced to resign due to intolerable conditions on [Date]

Demotion/Reassignment
- [ ] Demoted from [Former Position] to [New Position] on [Date]
- [ ] Reassigned to less desirable duties/location/shift on [Date]
- [ ] Stripped of [responsibilities / authority / direct reports] on [Date]

Compensation Reductions
- [ ] Salary reduced from $[Amount] to $[Amount] on [Date]
- [ ] Bonus denied or reduced on [Date]
- [ ] Hours reduced from [X] to [X] per week on [Date]

Performance/Discipline
- [ ] Received negative performance review on [Date] (previously had positive reviews)
- [ ] Placed on performance improvement plan (PIP) on [Date]
- [ ] Received written warning on [Date] for [pretextual reason]
- [ ] Suspended [with/without] pay from [Date] to [Date]

Hostile Treatment/Exclusion
- [ ] Excluded from meetings, communications, or decisions
- [ ] Subjected to increased scrutiny and micromanagement
- [ ] Isolated from coworkers or ostracized
- [ ] Given impossible tasks or set up to fail

Other Adverse Actions
- [ ] Denied promotion to [Position] on [Date]
- [ ] Negative reference provided to prospective employer
- [ ] [Other: describe]

B. Timeline of Retaliation

C. Evidence of Causal Connection

The causal connection between our client's protected activity and the adverse actions is demonstrated by:

1. Temporal Proximity

The adverse actions began just [X days/weeks] after our client's protected activity. Oregon courts recognize that close temporal proximity between protected activity and adverse action supports an inference of causation. See Snead v. Metro. Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 237 F.3d 1080 (9th Cir. 2001) (applying Oregon law).

2. Knowledge

The decision-makers who took adverse action against our client had knowledge of [his/her/their] protected activity.

3. Pattern of Antagonism

Following the protected activity, our client experienced a sudden shift in treatment from positive to hostile.

4. Pretext

The reasons offered by [Company Short Name] for the adverse actions are pretextual.

IV. LEGAL CLAIMS

A. Oregon Whistleblower Law

Or. Rev. Stat. Section 659A.199

Our client is entitled to protection under Oregon's Whistleblower Law because [he/she/they] in good faith:

[Select applicable theory]

• [ ] Reporting Criminal Activity: Reported criminal activity by any person.

• [ ] Reporting Violations: Reported information that [he/she/they] believed was evidence of a violation of state or federal law, rule, or regulation.

• [ ] Healthcare Reporting: Reported to a health care regulatory board information about patient care that [he/she/they] believed constituted a violation of law.

• [ ] Refusal to Violate Law: Refused to violate state or federal law.

The law or regulation at issue is [cite specific Oregon statute, federal law, or regulation].

B. Oregon Civil Rights Laws - Retaliation

Or. Rev. Stat. Section 659A.030

Our client [opposed discrimination / filed a complaint / testified / participated in an investigation] and suffered retaliation as a result.

The protected conduct related to discrimination based on [identify protected class under Oregon law].

C. Common Law Wrongful Discharge

Our client's termination violated the well-established public policy of Oregon as expressed in [cite specific statute or constitutional provision].

As established in Nees v. Hocks, 272 Or. 210 (1975), Oregon recognizes a cause of action for wrongful discharge in violation of public policy.

D. Federal Claims (If Applicable)

[Include if federal claims are being asserted alongside Oregon claims]

• [ ] Title VII Anti-Retaliation, 42 U.S.C. Section 2000e-3(a)
• [ ] 42 U.S.C. Section 1981 (Race-Based Retaliation)
• [ ] ADA Anti-Retaliation, 42 U.S.C. Section 12203
• [ ] ADEA Anti-Retaliation, 29 U.S.C. Section 623(d)
• [ ] FLSA Anti-Retaliation, 29 U.S.C. Section 215(a)(3)

V. DAMAGES

A. Economic Damages

1. Lost Wages (Back Pay)

2. Lost Benefits

3. Front Pay

B. Compensatory Damages

For emotional distress and other non-economic harm:

• [Describe emotional impact]
• [Describe physical manifestations]
• [Describe impact on daily life]

Compensatory damages: $[Amount]

Note: Oregon does not cap compensatory damages in employment discrimination or retaliation cases.

C. Punitive Damages

For willful, malicious, or egregious conduct:

Punitive damages: $[Amount]

Note: Oregon does not cap punitive damages in employment cases, though constitutional limitations may apply.

D. Interest

Pre-judgment interest as provided by Oregon law.

E. Attorney's Fees and Costs

Oregon law provides for recovery of reasonable attorney's fees in whistleblower and discrimination cases under Or. Rev. Stat. Section 659A.885.

Estimated fees through trial: $[Amount]
Estimated costs: $[Amount]

F. Summary of Damages

VI. SETTLEMENT DEMAND

Based on the foregoing, we demand that [Company Short Name] pay $[Settlement Demand Amount] in full and final settlement of all claims arising from the unlawful retaliation against our client.

Settlement Terms

In addition to the monetary payment, settlement must include:

• [ ] Neutral Reference: [Company Short Name] will provide only dates of employment and final position
• [ ] Personnel File: Expungement of all documents related to the pretextual discipline and termination
• [ ] Non-Disparagement: Mutual non-disparagement provisions
• [ ] Confidentiality: Subject to negotiation
• [ ] Unemployment: [Company Short Name] will not contest unemployment benefits

VII. RESPONSE DEADLINE

Please respond to this demand in writing within fourteen (14) calendar days of receipt, no later than [Response Deadline Date].

Critical Deadlines:
- Whistleblower claims (2 years): [Date]
- BOLI complaint (1 year): [Date]
- Direct court filing for civil rights claims (5 years): [Date]
- EEOC filing deadline (if applicable): [Date]

If we do not receive a satisfactory response, we will file suit in [Oregon Circuit Court, [County] County] or [United States District Court, District of Oregon] asserting:

1. Violation of Oregon Whistleblower Law, Or. Rev. Stat. Section 659A.199
2. Retaliation in violation of Oregon Civil Rights Laws, Or. Rev. Stat. Section 659A.030 [if applicable]
3. Common law wrongful discharge in violation of public policy
4. [Additional claims as applicable]

VIII. DOCUMENT PRESERVATION

This letter constitutes formal notice of litigation. [Company Short Name] must immediately implement a litigation hold to preserve all documents and ESI relevant to our client's employment, the protected activity, and all adverse actions.

Spoliation of evidence may result in sanctions and adverse inferences under Oregon law.

IX. CONFIDENTIALITY

This letter is a confidential settlement communication protected by Oregon Evidence Code Rule 408 and applicable state law.

We are prepared to discuss resolution of this matter at your earliest convenience. Please contact me to arrange a settlement conference.

Sincerely,

[Attorney Name]
[Title]
[Firm Name]

[Attorney Signature Block]

Enclosures:
- [ ] BOLI Complaint (if applicable)
- [ ] EEOC Charge (if applicable)
- [ ] Right to Sue Notice (if applicable)
- [ ] Authorization to Represent

cc: [Client Name] (via email)
[File]

OREGON-SPECIFIC PRACTICE NOTES

Comprehensive Whistleblower Protections: Oregon's whistleblower law is among the most comprehensive in the nation, protecting employees who report any violation of state or federal law, not just specific categories of violations.

Good Faith Requirement: The employee must act in "good faith" when making reports. This means a genuine belief that a violation occurred, though the belief need not be correct.

Direct Court Filing Option: For many claims under Or. Rev. Stat. Chapter 659A, plaintiffs may file directly in court within five years without first filing with BOLI. This provides significant flexibility compared to states requiring administrative exhaustion.

No Damage Caps: Oregon does not impose statutory caps on compensatory or punitive damages in employment discrimination or retaliation cases. This makes Oregon a favorable jurisdiction for plaintiffs with substantial damages.

Broad Protected Classes: Oregon protects more classes than federal law, including sexual orientation, gender identity, and marital status.

BOLI Alternative: While not required for many claims, filing with BOLI can be strategic as it triggers an investigation and potential mediation at no cost to the employee.

Strong Public Policy Tradition: Oregon has a strong tradition of recognizing public policy-based wrongful discharge claims, dating back to Nees v. Hocks in 1975.

Fee-Shifting: Prevailing plaintiffs are entitled to attorney's fees under Or. Rev. Stat. Section 659A.885, making it easier to obtain legal representation.

Injured Worker Protection: Oregon specifically prohibits discrimination against workers who have filed workers' compensation claims, with explicit statutory protection.