Many people go to work and just want to work. They clock in, keep their heads down, avoid the office drama, eat lunch, work some more, go home, and repeat. Most employees aren’t trying to stand up for anyone else or make waves. They’re not looking to become the star of HR’s next episode. They want stability, not conflict; a paycheck, not a storyline. So, what happens when HR comes calling and suddenly wants you in the middle of something you never asked for? Can an employee really be wrongfully fired just for refusing?
That uneasy question sits at the center of Franklin v. Maximus, Inc., 2025 WL 3175260. Maurice Franklin was a long-serving employee who climbed the ladder from supervisor to Vice President over more than a decade. Things went sideways when Project Manager Clyde Stith accused Senior Vice President Laura Rosenak of race discrimination, triggering an internal investigation. HR told Franklin he would be interviewed and, according to the record, an executive told him he needed to “go along” with Rosenak. Franklin didn’t know Stith had raised a race-based complaint; he thought Rosenak was the one complaining about Stith and that taking part could hurt his career. So, he asked to be left out of it entirely.
From there, pressure built. A reorganization proposal surfaced that would have eliminated Franklin’s role. Later, a separate restructuring created new positions, but at least one white applicant with more experience was selected over him. Franklin filed internal ethics complaints alleging employment discrimination and retaliation, but outside investigators deemed the claims meritless. Eventually he filed suit, took FMLA leave, negotiated a severance agreement, revoked it, and still faced termination as his employer declared his former position unnecessary. Franklin then sued for wrongful termination and retaliation.
Employees often assume that avoiding conflict protects them. Whether refusing to participate in an HR investigation counts as protected activity—and whether declining that interview can lead to wrongful termination—is where the real legal analysis begins.
What Type Of Activity Is Protected From Retaliation Under The Law?
Most employees think laws like Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (“ADEA”) only protect people from discrimination itself. Fired because you’re Black? Not promoted because of gender discrimination? Harassed because of sexual orientation discrimination? Given a worse shift because you are Hispanic – that national origin discrimination, right? Everyone gets that those are illegal. That part of employment law is familiar, even if you never crack open a statute book.
What far fewer employees realize is that these laws also protect people from retaliation. Retaliation is its own separate wrong—and one of the most common ways employers break the law. Retaliation happens when an employer punishes an employee for stepping up, speaking out, or helping out in a matter involving suspected discrimination or harassment. And in many workplaces, retaliation happens faster and louder than the discrimination ever did.
But here’s the part most employees don’t know: you are only protected from retaliation if you engage in protected activity.
Protected activity generally comes in two forms. First, opposing discrimination. This could mean complaining about discrimination, reporting unfair treatment you believe involves discrimination, or even just raising concerns in good faith. You don’t have to be right—you just have to genuinely believe discrimination is involved. Second, participating in a discrimination investigation. That includes answering HR’s questions when the investigation actually involves discrimination. Participation is broadly protected because employers shouldn’t be allowed to punish employees for helping uncover discrimination.
Most employees wrongly assume that anything they do during a workplace conflict counts as protected activity. It doesn’t. Employment law is specific. It only turns on when your actions connect directly to discrimination—not general unfairness, office politics, personality clashes, or wanting to avoid conflict.
Understanding that difference is crucial. Whether an employee actually opposed discrimination—or merely tried to duck workplace drama—determines whether the law protects them from retaliation.
Practical Tip: If you believe discrimination may be part of what’s happening at work, say it clearly. Your words matter. They determine whether the law protects you later.
Best Employment Retaliation Lawyer Blogs on Point:
- HR Professionals Can Sue For Retaliation—And Muldrow Makes It Easier To Win
- Can I Be Fired for Reporting Workplace Discrimination To HR?
- Why Reporting Race Discrimination To HR Is Critical
Does Saying “Leave Me Out Of It” Count As Opposing Discrimination At Work?
Employees often think avoiding conflict is the smart move. HR calls, and your instincts scream: stay out of it. You’re not trying to blow the whistle, pick sides, or get dragged into someone else’s workplace battle. But legally, that instinct to avoid trouble can backfire—especially when discrimination is somewhere in the background.
Franklin found himself in exactly that position. HR told him he would be interviewed as part of an internal investigation after Stith accused Rosenak of race discrimination. But Franklin didn’t know that at the time. He thought Rosenak was actually accusing Stith of insubordination. In his mind, the whole thing was office politics, not discrimination. So he told HR to leave him out of it because he believed participating would hurt his career.
Here’s where the employment law trap snapped shut.
Remember the rule from Section 1: you are only protected from retaliation if you engage in protected activity—meaning you either oppose discrimination or participate in an investigation about discrimination. The key is what the employee understood at the moment they acted.
And the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals held that the record “does not permit a reasonable inference that Franklin sought to oppose race discrimination.” The Court held that Franklin’s shifting explanations for refusing to participate undermined any claim that he was opposing discrimination. The Court further held that “no reasonable juror could infer that Franklin’s refusal to participate was an attempt to oppose race discrimination.”
Because Franklin never engaged in protected activity, his retaliation claim collapsed at the starting line. And to make the point unmistakable, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals held that “timing is irrelevant because refusal to participate in the investigation was not a protected activity.”
Without engaging in a protected activity, there is no protection and thus, no wrongful termination.
Practical Tip: If HR asks you to participate in any investigation, always ask what the investigation is about. If discrimination is involved, your participation becomes protected. If you refuse without knowing, you may lose important legal protections.
Best Wrongful Termination Attorney Blogs on Point:
- Can I Be Fired For Reporting Sexual Harassment And Discrimination At Work?
- What Is The Statute Of Limitations For Race, National Origin, Religion And Retaliation?
- No, Judge, The “N-Word” Is Not – And Never Will Be -A Term Of Endearment
Who Helps Employees Fight Back Against Retaliation And Discrimination?
When an employee is staring down an employer that seems bigger, louder, and determined to dictate the narrative, the last thing they need is another firm that treats them like a file number. They need an attorney who knows how employers operate, how retaliation unfolds behind closed doors, and how to protect workers who feel cornered by HR, management, or corporate restructuring. That’s where Spitz, The Employee’s Law Firm stands apart. As one of the largest law firms in the United States dedicated exclusively to employee rights, Spitz brings the best resources, the best strategy, and the best firepower that most firms simply cannot match. Size matters when an employer is trying to bury you in explanations, excuses, or shifting stories.
But resources mean nothing without heart. What truly makes Spitz the best choice for employees is the combination of deep employment law experience, vast trial success, and genuine empathy for people who have been wrongfully fired, pushed out, or silenced. Every lawyer here knows what retaliation looks like from the inside out, and every attorney knows how to build a case that puts an employee’s truth at the center. With a free initial consultation and a no-fee guarantee, there is no reason to wait. If you believe your employer has crossed the line, call Spitz today. Your job, your income, and your dignity are worth protecting.
Employment Lawyer Disclaimer
This employee rights blog provides general information to help an employee understand how employment law handles issues like discrimination, retaliation, and wrongful termination. It is not legal advice, and reading this employment law resource does not create an attorney-client relationship with any lawyer or attorney at Spitz or anywhere else. Every situation is different, and an employer’s decisions can only be evaluated properly by a qualified employment lawyer who can review the specific facts. Nothing in this blog promises any particular result in a discrimination, retaliation, or wrongful termination case. Past outcomes do not guarantee future outcomes, and no employee should rely on this content as a substitute for personalized legal advice. This employment law firm communication is a legal advertisement intended to help employees recognize when an employer may have engaged in employment discrimination or retaliation and when it may be time to speak with an attorney.