relief through that avenue. It is true that several jurisdictions recognize an exception to at-will termination via a tort for retaliatory or wrongful discharge where the discharge contravenes public policy. See, e.g. Sheets v. Teddy’s Frosted Foods, Inc., 179 Conn. 471, 427 A.2d 385, 388-89 (1980) (recognizing a claim for wrongful discharge in violation of public policy where plaintiff was fired for insisting his employer comply with FDA requirements); Martin Marietta Corp. v. Lorenz, 823 P.2d 100, 108 (Colo.1992) (recognizing cause of action under public policy exception to at-will termination doctrine where employee refused to report falsely to his superior the safety and quality of a machine); Palmateer v. Int’l Harvester Co., 85 Ill.2d 124, 52 Ill.Dec. 13, 421 N.E.2d 876 (1981) (<HOLDING>). However, Florida does not have such a public
holding that an atwill employee who alleges retaliatory discharge for the filing of a workers compensation claim has stated a cause of action under pennsylvania law holding that federal law can provide source of state public policy for determining whether discharge of employee violated clear mandate of public policy holding employee has cause of action for retaliatory discharge in contravention of public policy where employee was fired for reporting fellow employees alleged criminal activities to local law enforcement holding that employees retaliatory discharge based on employees election to public office did not violate public policy recognizing retaliatory discharge cause of action when employee discharged to prevent vesting of pension benefits