An employee of the Village of Cardington who claimed he was fired for reporting problems at the local wastewater treatment plant did not establish that he qualified as a whistleblower under state law or that his employer committed any crimes, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled Wednesday.
Donald Lee, who worked at the plant, was “instrumental” in uncovering a manufacturer’s illegal disposal of hazardous chemicals into the public water supply, Justice Judith L. French noted in the court’s 5-2 majority opinion. However, the court concluded that Lee cannot receive whistleblower protection because he did not meet the reporting requirements mandated by statute when alleging that his employer also perpetrated crimes.
The decision reverses the judgment of the Fifth District Court of Appeals.
One of Lee’s job responsibilities was to oversee operations at the village wastewater treatment plant. In 2000, he noticed equipment problems and unusual accumulations of foam, and he notified the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency.
By spring 2007, the problems were worsening. After an inspection that year, Ohio EPA ruled that the treatment plant was not the source of the contamination. The investigation then began to focus on Cardington Yutaka Technologies (CYT), the village’s largest employer and a manufacturer of auto parts. The federal EPA became involved, and CYT was found responsible for the pollutant, glycol, in the water supply.
Lee said he was focused on efforts to repair the $750,000 in damage to the plant caused by the chemical. Lee discussed the problems with the village administrator, Dan Ralley, who was his supervisor. They disagreed about how to repair the equipment. Because the plant could not filter out the glycol, Lee also worried that the chemical was continuing through to Whetstone Creek, which supplies drinking water to water plants downstream. He was further concerned that if they waited to fix the damage, the plant might exceed the limits in its operating permit for discharging sewage.
Lee expressed his views at village council meetings in September and December 2008.
The village fired Lee in June 2009. He claimed they were retaliating against him because of the issues he raised, but the village asserted there were other reasons for his termination.
Lee sued the village later that year, arguing that he was terminated in violation of Ohio’s whistleblower statute and public policy.
The trial court granted summary judgment to the village on the claim involving the whistleblower statute. It found that Lee had only reported that the equipment failures caused the CYT’s disposal of glycol and had not identified any environmental crime. As a result, Lee was not entitled to whistleblower protection, the court concluded.
On appeal, the Fifth District reversed. The village appealed to the Ohio Supreme Court which reversed the appeals court decision Wednesday, reinstating the original trial court’s decision.
Click here to read more about this story. To view the entire decision, click here.
Below is a video of the oral arguments for this case.
About Marion Online News
