§ 1.2.7.1 RECOGNITION OF THE IMPLIED CONTRACT IN EMPLOYMENT CASES.

• Jurisdiction: Arizona

§ 1.2.7.1 Recognition of the Implied Contract in Employment Cases. One court has stated, "What one's words imply is also what one's words express."⁵⁶ Implied contracts had long been recognized in commercial law, but American courts, under the sway of laissez faire and Wood's at-will rule, were unwilling to apply the same principle to employment contracts.

Implied terms first appeared in an Arizona labor case in Gates v. Arizona Brewing Co.⁵⁷ In Gates, a collective bargaining contract provided that workers could not be discharged except for cause. The court said that this provision implied that the union, although not expressly agreeing to do so, agreed to supply the employer with workers who were competent, obedient, and who would perform their work in a competent manner. The court then held that implied terms of a contract are as much a part of the contract as are the written terms.

The first Arizona case to hold that an employer's policies could be implied into the contract of what would otherwise be an at-will contract, without explicitly so stating, was Dimond.⁵⁸ In Dimond, the plaintiff argued that Samaritan's hospital policies and procedures constituted a contract between the employee and the hospital. Judge Howard, speaking for the court, said that "[a]s far as a private hospital is concerned, it...