retaliatory discharge is whether by discharging the complaining employee the employer violated a “clear mandate of public policy.” See Vigil, 102 N.M. at 688, 699 P.2d at 619. A clear mandate of public policy sufficient to support a claim of retaliatory discharge may be gleaned from the enactments of the legislature and the decisions of the courts and may fall into one of sever 91); Salazar v. Furr’s, Inc., 629 F.Supp. 1403, 1409 (D.N.M.1986)(family unity is not public policy protected by retaliatory discharge cause of action); Paca v. K-Mart Corp., 108 N.M. 479, 480-81, 775 P.2d 245, 246-47 (1989)(discharge for violation of company policy did not violate public policy); Francis v. Memorial Gen. Hosp., 104 N.M. 698, 701, 726 P.2d 852, 855 (19 3, 285, 742 P.2d [491,] 495, 497 [(1987)] (<HOLDING>); Vigil, 102 N.M. at 690, 699 P.2d at 621
recognizing the difference between statutory cause of action for retaliation and common law tort of retaliatory discharge recognizing retaliatory discharge cause of action when plaintiff discharged for whistleblowing recognizing retaliatory discharge cause of action when employee discharged to prevent vesting of pension benefits recognizing cause of action for wrongful discharge recognizing the tort of retaliatory discharge