I think some people are missing the point. This has little to do with what armchair quarterbacks think about right and wrong. Regardless of what one might think of the individual's character or motivations, or events that happened subsequent to his termination (which would normally be excluded from the evidence in the trial anyway; bringing them up in the complaint complicates this) it is the reaction of the company which is problematic. If the complaint is accurate, rather than research their duties and rights under the act, they apparently chose to disregard and violate it. In addition, they made numerous statements along the way (statements that did not have to be made at all) which apparently showed a strong willingness to violate the law--and formed the basis for a wrongful termination claim . Whether this was due to ignorance, arrogance, a combination of the two, or something else entirely no one knows. What it did result in was a paper trail of fairly strong evidence which is now being used to drag the company into a lawsuit it must spend money to defend, and if the complaint is accurate stands an excellent chance of losing. This isn't the first time something like this has happened and it would be nice if they would learn from their errors.