Indiana recognizes two primary forms of employment; at-will and contract for a definite term. At-will employment may be terminated by the employee or employer at any time, for any reason or no reason. Employment under a contract for a definite term may only be terminated for reasons specified in the contract. Business owners may also be self-employed.

There are two forms of employment contracts. An employment contract may be for a definite term. An employment agreement that is indefinite is at-will.

In general, a valid employment contract must state the placement of employment, the nature of the job, the duration of the contract, and the compensation to be paid.

Generally, yes. However, some employee fringe benefit plans, such as health insurance or retirement plans, may require that employees work a certain number of hours to be eligible to participate.

Employment contracts are personal service agreements that cannot be assigned without the consent of the parties. The parties can agree to assignment in advance.

Absent some bargained for contractual right contained in an employment agreement or collective bargaining agreement, employees have no such rights.

No

Absent some bargained for contract that controls the terms of employment, employers are free to change the terms of employment without any remedy being afforded an employee.

Generally, in Indiana, an employment is "at-will," subject to certain common law and statutory restrictions on the ability of an employer to separate an employee. Such statutes can be federal statutes, such as Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the Family and Medical Leave Act, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, the Fair Labor Standards Act, and many others. Further, there are Indiana-specific statutes that place restrictions on employers' ability to terminate an employment relationship including: the Indiana Civil Rights Law; the Indiana Age Discrimination Law; the Indiana Military Family Leave Law, and statutes prohibiting discrimination against smokers who engage in tobacco use outside the workplace. Also, an employment relationship that is subject to a contract (such as a written employment agreement for a fixed period of time or a collective bargaining agreement) is not an at-will employment relationship. As noted above, there are common law restrictions on the ability of an employer to discharge an employee. These protections prohibit employers from discharging an employee for exercising a statutorily conferred or protected right, such as seeking benefits under the worker's compensation laws. Another common law exception to the at-will employment doctrine prohibits employers from discharging an employee for refusing to commit an unlawful act. Further, where an employer promises permanent employment or where an employee is hired with the knowledge that the employee gave up job protected status with another employer to take the new employment may not be at-will.

If the wrongful termination from employment is considered a tort (such as under one of the common law exceptions to at-will employment), then damages such as economic and noneconomic damages are potentially available to the former employee.

If the sanctions are based upon statutory violations, the range of damages can vary according to the particular statute's remedy provisions. For example, violations of the Indiana Civil Rights Law may be remedied by damages including any of the following: injunctive relief, retroactive relief (such as back pay, retroactive seniority, and reinstatement), front pay, interest on damage awards, punitive damages, and attorneys' fees.

Beyond the range of federal laws providing whistleblower protections, Indiana has statutes providing protection to whistleblower employees of private employers that have public contracts. For example, a statute (Ind. Code 22-5-3-3) provides a process by which employees may report a violation of federal or state laws/regulations, a violation of a local ordinance, or the misuse of public resources. That statute includes protection from adverse employment actions (such as discharge from employment, demotion, denial of promotion, reduction in compensation or benefits or job transfer/reassignment) taken in retaliation for such whistleblower activities. Another statute (Ind. Code 22-8-1.1-38.1) provides protection from retaliation against employees who engage in certain safety-related actions. This is NOT an exhaustive list of whistleblower protections, but is meant to note that there are various such protections in Indiana.

Indiana law regarding security breaches covers employers who own or license data that includes certain personal information. If there is a security breach regarding such data, the employer must disclose such a breach to the affected individual and to the Indiana Attorney General.

Employers who own computerized data are obligated to maintain reasonable measures to protect and safeguard personal information from unlawful use or disclosure.

In addition to potential security issues, Indiana law also makes it a crime, except in specific circumstances, to disclose a person's Social Security Number.

Data disposal is also regulated under Indiana law which prohibits, and in some cases criminalizes, the disposal of data containing certain categories of personal information unless steps are taken to render the data illegible or unusable by third parties.

Indiana is a "one-party" jurisdiction in which it is generally lawful to record a conversation as long as one party to the conversation consents to such recording.

The Indiana Civil Rights Law generally prohibits employers with six or more employees from discharging employees because of race, religion, color, sex, disability, national origin or ancestry, or due to the employee's participation in a civil rights investigation.

Indian also maintains an Indiana Age Discrimination Law that prohibits employers (who are not covered under the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act) from discriminating against employees over the age of 40 on the basis of age.

The Indiana Occupational Safety and Health Act provides protection against adverse employment action taken due to an employee's complaint about safety/health issues.

There is an Indiana statute protecting employees from employer policies that seek to prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting an employee from possessing a firearm/ammunition that is: locked in the trunk of the employees' vehicle (even if the vehicle is in the employer's parking lot), kept in the glove box of the employee's locked vehicle, or stored out of plain sight in the employee's locked vehicle. There are exceptions to the law that apply to, for example, schools, daycare facilities for children, and group homes. Employers cannot inquire as to whether a job applicant or employee owns, possesses, uses or transports firearms. Employers also may not condition terms of employment on the basis of an applicant's or employee's foregoing the right to lawfully own, possess, store, transport or use firearms.

Indiana employers may not discriminate on the basis of an employee's use of tobacco outside of the employment.

Employers cannot discriminate against an employee who reports suspected employer failure to comply with legal requirements to train on infection control measures intended to prevent transmission of communicable diseases.

Indiana also has a minimum wage law that prevents employers (who are not covered under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act) from discharging or discriminating against employees for taking action to recover wages or demanding payment of wages under the law.

Indiana Veteran's Affairs Law provides protection against adverse employment action taken due to an employee-reservist's taking protected leave for duty.

A similar anti-discrimination law protects employee-volunteer firefighters from employer discrimination due to the employee's service as a firefighter.

Employers are prohibited from discharging an employee due to the employer's receipt of a wage garnishment order directed at the employee's wages.

Indiana employers may not adversely affect an employee's employment or benefits or threaten the employee due to the employee's receipt of a jury summons, the employee's response to the summons, the employee's reporting to court for prospective service or attendance on a jury.

Indiana law does not require private employers to offer vacation, medical or parental leave benefits.

Indiana has a Military Family Leave law that applies to employers that employ at least 50 employees for each working day during each of at least 20 calendar weeks. The law provides job-protected leave to certain family members of individuals on active duty in the U.S. Armed Forces or the Indiana Army or Air National Guard. Eligible employees include spouses, parents (including biological, adoptive and foster parents), children, brothers, sisters, grandparents (including biological, adoptive and foster grandparents), and court-appointed guardians and custodians of the person ordered to active duty.

Employees are eligible for leave if they have been employed by the employer for at least 12 months and have worked at least 1,500 hours during the 12-month period immediately preceding the date leave would begin. Eligible employees may take up to 10 days of leave from work for qualifying circumstances during: the 30-day period before active duty orders are in effect; a period of leave provided to the active-duty serviceperson while active duty orders are in effect; or the 30-day period after the termination of the active-duty orders. Employers are prohibited from retaliating against or discriminating against employees who exercise their leave rights.

There is no Indiana statute that governs the enforceability of restrictive covenants. Under Indiana common law, courts will enforce non-competition restrictions as part of a legitimate agreement with an employee if the restrictions are needed to protect customer goodwill or confidential information and the restrictions are reasonable in terms of (a) time, (b) geography and (c) the scope of the activities restricted. Such factors must be evaluated in the context of the employee's job position and responsibilities.

There is no bright-line rule regarding the temporal length of a restrictive covenant, but case law suggests restrictions of up to two years will be upheld in Indiana. The reasonableness of the geographic area proscribed by an employee non-competition agreement is judged in the context of the area of the employee's duties or responsibility, which may not be the full geographic area of the employer's business. As for the scope of the activities proscribed, Indiana requires that the scope be consistent with the employee's duties or role. Indiana courts disfavor the use of broad restrictions that prohibit the employee from working for or being employed by a competitor in any capacity. Indiana courts disfavor such "blanket" restrictions because they are broader than necessary to protect the employer's legitimate interests (i.e. customer goodwill and confidential information).

Indiana utilizes a strict "blue-pencil rule" in evaluating non-compete covenants. Under Indiana's blue-pencil rule, the court may delete unenforceable provisions, or severable parts of a provision, and enforce the remainder. Courts in Indiana will not reform the non-compete provisions by adding or changing words.

Yes, employees can be terminated for refusing to sign a restrictive covenant. In Indiana, the commencement of at-will employment or continued at-will employment is adequate consideration for a restrictive covenant agreement.

No

Indiana law does not require private employers to offer retirement, medical or other employee benefits to employees.

The Indiana Age Discrimination Act (IADA) applies only to employers that are not subject to the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) and prohibits discrimination against individuals who are at least 40 but not yet 75 years of age. The IADA would permit an employer to adopt a policy of compulsory retirement at age 75 (or greater), but the ADEA has no upper age limit, and would prohibit such a policy for employers covered by that federal law.

No

Response Pending

Response Pending