HUNTINGTON — A former T-Mobile employee alleges the company wrongfully fired him after a customer threatened him at work and he called law enforcement rather than engage in a fight.
Kevin M. Chaney filed his complaint October 20 in Cabell Circuit Court against T-Mobile USA.
According to the complaint, T-Mobile hired Chaney as a mobile expert in 2021, and he says he performed his duties satisfactorily or better and met or exceeded the company’s reasonable expectations.
Near the end of August, Chaney says a customer behaved disrespectfully toward a co-worker, causing the co-worker to cry, the complaint states. The customer left because the store’s system was down but returned and continued behaving in a hostile and physically threatening manner toward employees, according to the complaint.
“The customer verbally threatened Mr. Chaney and attempted to fight him,” the complaint states.
Chaney alleges he feared for his physical safety and called law enforcement after the customer refused his request to leave. He maintains he did not initiate or engage in workplace violence or harm the customer.
According to the complaint, Chaney continued working for about two weeks after the incident without the company raising concerns about his conduct. T-Mobile fired him after he reported for work September 4, “presumably based on the matter involving the customer who threatened him,” the complaint states.
Chaney accuses T-Mobile of wrongful discharge in violation of substantial public policy. It cites a 2001 West Virginia Supreme Court decision in Feliciano v. 7-Eleven Inc. as the basis for Chaney’s argument that employees should not be fired for taking reasonable self-defense measures in response to imminent danger.
“In refusing to engage with his attacker, the plaintiff reasonably expected that defendant would not terminate him because he had not initiated or engaged in workplace violence,” the complaint states.
Chaney argues the company knew or should have known he had not engaged in violence or other unprotected conduct. He alleges the firing lacked a legitimate business justification and undermined public policy protecting employees who respond nonviolently to imminent physical threats.
He alleges his dismissal violated West Virginia public policy protecting employees who act in self-defense or are innocent victims of threatened workplace violence. He alleges he lost income because of the dismissal. He seeks general and compensatory damages for annoyance, inconvenience, embarrassment, humiliation and emotional distress, along with punitive damages, attorney fees and interest.
Chaney is being represented by Hoyt Glazer of Glazer Saad Anderson in Huntington.
Cabell Circuit Court case number 26-C-504
