WRONGFUL TERMINATION DEMAND LETTER

Hawaii Law

[ATTORNEY/FIRM LETTERHEAD]

[Firm Name]
[Address Line 1]
[City, State ZIP]
Tel: [Phone Number]
Fax: [Fax Number]
[Attorney Email]
[Hawaii State Bar No.]

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]

Re: Wrongful Termination of [Client Full Name]
Former Position: [Job Title]
Dates of Employment: [Start Date] through [Termination Date]
CONFIDENTIAL SETTLEMENT COMMUNICATION - HRE Rule 408

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

This firm represents [Client Full Name] ("our client") regarding [his/her/their] wrongful termination from employment with [Company Legal Name] ("[Company Short Name]") on [Termination Date]. Please direct all further communications to our office.

We write to demand immediate action to remedy the unlawful termination and to resolve this matter short of litigation. [Company Short Name]'s termination of our client violates Hawaii law and exposes the Company to substantial liability.

I. HAWAII EMPLOYMENT LAW FRAMEWORK

A. At-Will Employment and Its Exceptions

Hawaii follows the employment-at-will doctrine but recognizes significant exceptions. See Parnar v. Americana Hotels, Inc., 65 Haw. 370, 652 P.2d 625 (1982).

1. Public Policy Exception

Hawaii broadly recognizes the public policy exception to at-will employment. See Parnar v. Americana Hotels, Inc., 65 Haw. 370, 652 P.2d 625 (1982) (landmark decision recognizing public policy tort in Hawaii).

Protected activities under Hawaii public policy include:
- Refusing to violate a law or regulation
- Reporting employer's illegal activities
- Exercising statutory rights (workers' compensation, jury duty)
- Filing complaints with regulatory agencies
- Performing important public duties

2. Implied Contract Exception

Hawaii recognizes implied employment contracts based on employer handbooks, policies, and oral representations. See Kinoshita v. Canadian Pac. Airlines, Ltd., 68 Haw. 594, 724 P.2d 110 (1986).

3. Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing

Hawaii recognizes an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing in employment relationships. See Kinoshita v. Canadian Pac. Airlines, Ltd., 68 Haw. 594, 724 P.2d 110 (1986).

4. Statutory Protections

Hawaii provides extensive statutory protections:
- Hawaii Employment Practices Act (HEPA): Haw. Rev. Stat. Section 378-1 et seq.
- Whistleblowers' Protection Act: Haw. Rev. Stat. Section 378-61 et seq.
- Workers' Compensation Retaliation: Haw. Rev. Stat. Section 386-142
- Jury Service Protection: Haw. Rev. Stat. Section 612-25
- Hawaii Family Leave Law: Haw. Rev. Stat. Section 398-1 et seq.

B. Hawaii Administrative Procedures

Hawaii Civil Rights Commission (HCRC):
- File within 180 days of alleged discriminatory act
- HCRC investigates and issues determination
- Dual-filing with EEOC available (300 days for EEOC in deferral state)
- Right to sue after 90 days if no final order

II. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

A. Employment History

[Client Full Name] was employed by [Company Short Name] from [Start Date] through [Termination Date] as a [Job Title] in [City], Hawaii.

Employment Summary:

Our client was a dedicated employee with an excellent performance record:
- [Describe positive performance history]
- [Describe promotions, raises, commendations]
- [Describe any relevant achievements]

B. The Protected Activity / Triggering Event

On or about [Date], our client [describe protected activity]:

• Reported illegal or unethical conduct under the Whistleblowers' Protection Act
• Refused to participate in illegal activity
• Filed a workers' compensation claim under Haw. Rev. Stat. Section 386-142
• Filed a discrimination complaint with HCRC
• Exercised rights under the Hawaii Family Leave Law
• [Other protected activity]

C. The Wrongful Termination

On [Termination Date], [Company Short Name] terminated our client, purportedly for [stated reason]. This stated reason is pretextual, as evidenced by:

1. Temporal proximity: The termination occurred just [X days/weeks] after the protected activity
2. Prior positive treatment: Our client had [no prior discipline / positive reviews / recent promotion]
3. Disparate treatment: Similarly situated employees who did not engage in protected activity were [not terminated / treated more favorably]
4. Shifting explanations: [Describe any inconsistent reasons given]
5. Direct evidence: [Describe any statements indicating true motive]

III. LEGAL CLAIMS UNDER HAWAII LAW

A. Wrongful Discharge in Violation of Public Policy

Under Parnar v. Americana Hotels, Inc., 65 Haw. 370, 652 P.2d 625 (1982), Hawaii recognizes a cause of action for wrongful discharge when termination violates a clear mandate of public policy.

Elements of Claim:
1. Employer-employee relationship
2. Termination of employment
3. Termination violated a clear mandate of public policy
4. Damages resulting from termination

Public Policy Violated: [Company Short Name] terminated our client for [describe conduct that violated public policy], which violates [cite specific Hawaii statute, regulation, or constitutional provision].

See also Smith v. Chaney Brooks Realty, Inc., 10 Haw. App. 250, 865 P.2d 170 (1994); Ross v. Stouffer Hotel Co., 76 Haw. 454, 879 P.2d 1037 (1994).

B. Whistleblower Retaliation (Haw. Rev. Stat. Section 378-61 et seq.)

Hawaii's Whistleblowers' Protection Act provides:

"An employer shall not discharge, threaten, or otherwise discriminate against an employee regarding the employee's compensation, terms, conditions, location, or privileges of employment because: (1) The employee... reports or is about to report to the employer, or reports or is about to report to a public body, verbally or in writing, a violation or a suspected violation of a law, rule, ordinance, or regulation..." Haw. Rev. Stat. Section 378-62.

Our client reported [describe report of violation] on [Date]. [Company Short Name] terminated our client in retaliation for this protected whistleblowing activity.

Remedies under Section 378-65:
- Injunctive relief
- Reinstatement to former position
- Back pay and reinstatement of fringe benefits and seniority rights
- Actual damages
- Reasonable attorney's fees and court costs

C. Retaliatory Discharge - Workers' Compensation (Haw. Rev. Stat. Section 386-142)

[If applicable:] Hawaii Revised Statutes Section 386-142 provides protection against discharge for filing workers' compensation claims.

Our client filed a workers' compensation claim on [Date] for [injury]. [Company Short Name] terminated our client in retaliation for exercising this statutory right.

D. Violation of Hawaii Employment Practices Act (HEPA)

[If applicable:] [Company Short Name]'s termination of our client constitutes unlawful [discrimination/retaliation] under Haw. Rev. Stat. Section 378-2 based on [protected characteristic/protected activity].

HEPA prohibits discrimination based on:
- Race, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression
- Age, religion, color, ancestry, disability
- Marital status, arrest and court record, domestic or sexual violence victim status
- National origin, citizenship, credit history, genetic information
- Reproductive health decisions, off-duty use of cannabis

HEPA provides broad remedies without statutory caps.

E. Breach of Implied Contract

[Company Short Name]'s Employee Handbook and representations created an implied contract limiting termination to "just cause" and/or requiring specific progressive discipline procedures.

Evidence of implied contract:
- Employee Handbook provisions stating [quote relevant language]
- Personnel policies requiring [describe procedures]
- Oral representations by [Name] that [describe assurances]

See Kinoshita v. Canadian Pac. Airlines, Ltd., 68 Haw. 594, 724 P.2d 110 (1986).

F. Breach of Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing

[Company Short Name] breached the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing by terminating our client [describe bad faith conduct].

See Kinoshita v. Canadian Pac. Airlines, Ltd., 68 Haw. 594, 724 P.2d 110 (1986).

IV. DAMAGES

A. Economic Damages

1. Back Pay

2. Lost Benefits

3. Front Pay

B. Compensatory Damages (Non-Economic)

Our client has suffered severe emotional distress:
- [Describe anxiety, depression, humiliation]
- [Describe impact on health and relationships]
- [Describe medical treatment sought]

Emotional distress damages: $[Amount]

C. Punitive Damages

[Company Short Name]'s conduct was willful, wanton, and in conscious disregard of our client's rights, warranting punitive damages under Hawaii law.

See Masaki v. Gen. Motors Corp., 71 Haw. 1, 780 P.2d 566 (1989) (punitive damages available for wanton or reckless disregard of rights).

D. Attorney's Fees

Under Haw. Rev. Stat. Section 378-65 (Whistleblowers' Protection Act) and Section 378-5 (HEPA), our client is entitled to reasonable attorney's fees.

Estimated fees through trial: $[Amount]

E. Summary of Damages

V. SETTLEMENT DEMAND

We demand that [Company Short Name] pay $[Settlement Demand Amount] in full settlement of all claims.

Additional Terms:
- Neutral reference (dates and position only)
- No contest to unemployment benefits
- Expungement of personnel file
- Mutual non-disparagement
- Confidentiality (terms to be negotiated)

VI. RESPONSE DEADLINE

Please respond within fourteen (14) calendar days, no later than [Response Deadline Date].

If we do not receive a satisfactory response, we are authorized to file suit in the [Circuit Court of the [First/Second/Third/Fifth] Circuit, State of Hawaii / United States District Court for the District of Hawaii] without further notice.

Causes of Action:
1. Wrongful Discharge in Violation of Public Policy
2. Violation of Hawaii Whistleblowers' Protection Act (Haw. Rev. Stat. Section 378-61 et seq.)
3. Violation of Hawaii Employment Practices Act (Haw. Rev. Stat. Section 378-1 et seq.)
4. Violation of Haw. Rev. Stat. Section 386-142 (Workers' Compensation Retaliation)
5. Breach of Implied Contract
6. Breach of Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing

VII. DOCUMENT PRESERVATION

Immediately implement a litigation hold to preserve all relevant documents and ESI regarding our client's employment, performance, and termination.

VIII. CONFIDENTIALITY

This letter is protected by Hawaii Rules of Evidence Rule 408 and constitutes a confidential settlement communication.

Sincerely,

[Attorney Name]
[Title]
[Firm Name]
[Hawaii State Bar No.]

Enclosures:
- Authorization to Represent

cc: [Client Name]
[File]

HAWAII-SPECIFIC PRACTICE NOTES (Do Not Include in Final Letter)

Key Hawaii Considerations

• Hawaii broadly recognizes public policy exception under Parnar
• Implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing recognized in employment
• HEPA provides extensive protections with no damages caps
• Whistleblowers' Protection Act provides fee-shifting
• Hawaii is a deferral state for EEOC purposes - 300-day deadline
• HCRC filing required for discrimination claims - 180-day deadline
• Hawaii has some of the most employee-friendly laws in the nation
• Credit history and arrest records are protected classes

Venue Options

• Hawaii Circuit Court (general jurisdiction)
• Federal Court (if federal claims or diversity jurisdiction)

Statute of Limitations

Key Hawaii Cases

• Parnar v. Americana Hotels, Inc., 65 Haw. 370, 652 P.2d 625 (1982)
• Kinoshita v. Canadian Pac. Airlines, Ltd., 68 Haw. 594, 724 P.2d 110 (1986)
• Smith v. Chaney Brooks Realty, Inc., 10 Haw. App. 250, 865 P.2d 170 (1994)
• Ross v. Stouffer Hotel Co., 76 Haw. 454, 879 P.2d 1037 (1994)
• Masaki v. Gen. Motors Corp., 71 Haw. 1, 780 P.2d 566 (1989)