As area manager, Harriet supervised the operations of about forty retail stores in the metro area. Her problems started when her boss told her that she was not performing well, and that she needed to 'shape up' to keep her job. Harriet prepared a list of things she was going to do to improve her effectiveness on the job and got the boss to OK those actions. A month later, her supervisor told Harriet that she was reassigned to one of her retail stores, to reacquaint herself with the front line. The store to which she was assigned was the farthest away, 53 miles from the corporate offices, and required a two hour one-way drive to get there. To make matters worse, her duties at the corporate offices were reassigned to another person, who removed her property from the office and put in his own desk, etc. At the first staff meeting after the changes, the CEO said that he was glad that 'we finally have someone who knows what is going on' in the job that is regularly Harriet's. At that point, Harriet decided to quit her job because she felt she could see that she was going to be fired. Now Harriet is thinking about possible legal action she can take, and wonders if she can sue for wrongful discharge. Which of the following is most correct? a. Harriet will not be able to bring a claim of 'wrongful discharge' based on the facts above.
b. Harriet can bring a claim of 'wrongful discharge' based on the facts above, but it will be thrown out by the court because she resigned, she was not discharged.
c. Harriet will not be able to bring a claim of 'wrongful discharge' based on the facts above unless the court finds that a reasonable person would have felt compelled to quit.
d. Under the doctrine of "Employment at Will", Harriet will win a claim of 'wrongful discharge' based on the facts above because she has been treated so badly.