Wrongful Termination LawsMissouri Laws flagMissouri Laws
Missouri flag

Missouri

Wrongful Termination in Missouri (2026): Laws, Deadlines, How to File

Independently fact-checkedBy Recording Law Editorial Team17 min read

Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited October 10, 2026). · 26 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content

Wrongful Termination in Missouri (2026): Laws, Deadlines, How to File

Missouri is an at-will state, so a firing is wrongful only when it breaks a specific law. The main state law is the Missouri Human Rights Act (RSMo chapter 213), which makes it an unlawful employment practice for an employer with six or more employees to "discharge any individual" because of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, ancestry, age or disability (RSMo 213.055.1(1)(a); 213.010(8)).

Missouri's state deadline is short. A complaint must reach the Missouri Commission on Human Rights within 180 days, and filing there is required before you can sue (RSMo 213.075.1). To compare other states, see our guide to wrongful termination laws by state.

Information last verified on October 10, 2026. This article has not been reviewed by a licensed lawyer.

Jurisdiction scope: This article covers Missouri law on firing employees: the at-will rule and its statutory exceptions, the Missouri Human Rights Act (RSMo chapter 213), the Whistleblower's Protection Act (RSMo 285.575), workers' compensation retaliation (RSMo 287.780), jury-service and other narrower protections, and the service letter statute, with short notes on the federal laws that also apply. The federal rules in full are on our wrongful termination laws by state guide. It does not cover severance agreements; see Missouri severance pay laws.

Is Missouri an at-will state?

Yes. Missouri's exceptions are now mostly written into statutes, and the Legislature has said those statutes are the exclusive remedies for employment claims (RSMo 213.070.2; 285.575.3). For how the doctrine works day to day, see Missouri at-will employment laws.

Grounds for a wrongful termination claim in Missouri

Discrimination under the Missouri Human Rights Act

RSMo 213.055.1 makes it an unlawful employment practice "for an employer, because of the race, color, religion, national origin, sex, ancestry, age or disability of any individual ... to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual." It also bars discrimination because of a person's association with someone in a protected class (RSMo 213.070.1(4)).

Who is covered. An "employer" has six or more employees for each working day in each of 20 or more calendar weeks in the current or preceding calendar year, and includes the state and its political subdivisions (RSMo 213.010(8)). The definition excludes religious or sectarian corporations and associations, the United States, Indian tribes, bona fide private membership clubs, and "an individual employed by an employer," so an individual supervisor is not personally an employer under the Act. Federal Title VII and the ADA start at 15 employees and the federal age law at 20 (42 U.S.C. 2000e(b), 12111(5); 29 U.S.C. 630(b)).

Age. Under the Act, "age" means 40 or more but less than 70 (RSMo 213.010(1)).

Sexual orientation and gender identity. They are not listed in the text of RSMo 213.055. In Lampley v. Missouri Commission on Human Rights, 570 S.W.3d 16 (Mo. banc 2019), the Missouri Supreme Court held that "an employee who suffers an adverse employment decision based on sex-based stereotypical attitudes of how a member of the employee's sex should act can support an inference of unlawful sex discrimination" under the Act. Kansas City and St. Louis ordinances list sexual orientation and gender identity expressly (below). Federal law covers them at employers with 15 or more employees: in Bostock v. Clayton County, 590 U.S. 644 (2020), the U.S. Supreme Court held that "an employer who fires an individual merely for being gay or transgender violates Title VII." The EEOC charge deadline in Missouri is 300 days.

The causation standard. The protected trait must be "the motivating factor" in the decision (RSMo 213.010(2)), and at trial the plaintiff must prove the decision was made because of it and that it was the direct proximate cause of the damages (RSMo 213.111.5). The 2017 law that set this standard expressly abrogated Daugherty v. City of Maryland Heights, 231 S.W.3d 814 (Mo. 2007), and its "contributing factor" test (RSMo 213.101.4). In MHRA jury trials, the jury must be given a business judgment instruction (RSMo 213.101.2).

Retaliation for opposing discrimination

RSMo 213.070.1(2) makes retaliation an unlawful practice under the Act. It carries the same 180-day complaint deadline and, for claims tied to employment discrimination under 213.055, the same remedies and caps (RSMo 213.111). That covers retaliation over age and disability complaints along with the other protected classes.

Whistleblower's Protection Act (RSMo 285.575)

In 2017 the Legislature codified the common-law public-policy exceptions in RSMo 285.575, stating that the section is "intended to codify the existing common law exceptions to the at-will employment doctrine and to limit their future expansion by the courts." It protects a "protected person," meaning an employee who:

  • reported to the proper authorities an unlawful act of the employer;
  • reported to the employer serious misconduct that violates "a clear mandate of public policy as articulated in a constitutional provision, statute, or regulation promulgated under statute"; or
  • refused to carry out a directive that would violate the law.

Limits. The Act does not protect supervisory, managerial or executive employees reporting matters they are employed to report, or a report made to the person accused of the misconduct. It covers employers with six or more employees for 20 weeks, and it excludes the state, its agencies and political subdivisions, and religious or sectarian corporations, so a public employee cannot use 285.575. Protected status must be "the motivating factor," meaning it actually played a role and had a determinative influence on the firing.

Remedies (RSMo 285.575.7): back pay and medical bills directly related to the violation, and, on clear and convincing evidence of outrageous conduct, double those amounts as liquidated damages. The Act is "not for punitive damages" (285.575.5). If another statute already gives a damages action for the conduct, there is no claim under 285.575 (285.575.5). Costs and attorney fees are available (subs. 8), and a jury trial is available (subs. 6).

Older cases. Before 2017, the Missouri Supreme Court recognized the public-policy exception in Fleshner v. Pepose Vision Institute, P.C., 304 S.W.3d 81 (Mo. banc 2010), using a "contributing factor" test that 285.575's "motivating factor" standard displaces for new claims. In Margiotta v. Christian Hospital Northeast Northwest, 315 S.W.3d 342 (Mo. banc 2010), the court called the exception "very narrowly drawn" and held that merely citing a regulation, without showing how the reported conduct violated it, was not enough.

Public employees (state and local, including volunteers and interns) are covered instead by RSMo 105.055, which bars discipline for disclosing information the employee reasonably believes shows a violation of law, mismanagement, a gross waste of funds, abuse of authority or a substantial and specific danger to public health or safety. A civil action for actual damages, with possible costs and attorney fees, must be filed within one year of the violation (105.055.7), and a state employee may also appeal to the Administrative Hearing Commission within one year (105.055.5); if the state auditor investigates, the deadline is the later of one year or 90 days after the auditor's report (105.055.8). More detail is on Missouri whistleblower laws.

Workers' compensation retaliation (RSMo 287.780)

No employer "shall discharge or discriminate against any employee for exercising any of his or her rights under this chapter when the exercising of such rights is the motivating factor," and a fired employee has a "civil action for damages" (RSMo 287.780). "Motivating factor" here also means the exercise of rights actually played a role and had a determinative influence. For benefits themselves, see Missouri workers' compensation laws.

Handbook promises

Missouri does not treat a handbook as a job-security contract. In Johnson v. McDonnell Douglas Corp., 745 S.W.2d 661 (Mo. banc 1988), the Missouri Supreme Court said it "declines to adopt such an exception and recognizes the continued validity of employment at will," rejecting a "handbook exception." A written contract with definite terms is a different question that this page does not cover.

Exclusive remedies

RSMo 213.070.2 says chapter 213, "in addition to chapter 285 and chapter 287, shall provide the exclusive remedy for any and all claims for injury or damages arising out of an employment relationship." RSMo 285.575.3 says the same for claims of unlawful employment practices. Because of these sections, a firing claim that does not fit chapter 213, RSMo 285.575, chapter 287 or another specific statute faces an exclusivity defense. A lawyer can tell you how they apply to your facts.

Constructive discharge

This page did not find a Missouri Supreme Court decision setting the standard for constructive discharge (quitting because conditions were made intolerable) under the Human Rights Act or 285.575. If you are considering resigning, get legal advice first.

Other Missouri laws that ban specific firings

ProtectionWhat it barsDeadline and remedySource
Jury serviceDischarging an employee over jury service; employer may not require use of leave for jury timeCivil action "within ninety days of discharge" for lost wages and other damages, reinstatement, and attorney fees to a prevailing employeeRSMo 494.460
VotingDischarging an employee for taking up to three hours off to vote (employee must ask before election day; employer may choose the hours; not required if the employee has three successive off-duty hours while polls are open)Class four election offense; no private damages action statedRSMo 115.639
State militia and U.S. Armed ForcesDiscriminating against a member of the organized militia or of the U.S. Armed Forces because of that membership (41.730.1); discharging a person because of membership in the organized militia of Missouri, or hindering military service (41.730.3)Misdemeanor; no private damages action stated in the sectionRSMo 41.730.1, .3
Medical marijuana cardholdersFiring or penalizing a qualifying patient or primary caregiver with a valid identification card for that status or legal off-premises use during nonworking hours, or a patient with a valid card for a positive test, unless used or under the influence at work or during work hours (does not apply if compliance would cost the employer a federal monetary or licensing benefit, or to a position where legal use affects in any manner the ability to do the job or the safety of others, or conflicts with a bona fide occupational qualification)Constitutional protection; the section does not state a deadline or damages remedyMo. Const. art. XIV, sec. 1.7(15)
Civil Air PatrolDischarging an employee for Civil Air Patrol membershipEnforced by the attorney general; no private damages statedRSMo 41.1000.3
Minimum wage complaintsDischarging an employee who notified the Department of Labor of unpaid minimum wage, started a proceeding, or testified in oneClass C misdemeanor; no private retaliation damages statedRSMo 290.525(7)
Domestic or sexual violence leaveTaking action against an employee over leave of up to two workweeks (50 or more employees) or one workweek (20 to 49) of unpaid leave; right to return to the same or an equivalent jobNo private damages action statedRSMo 285.630
Off-duty alcohol and tobaccoRefusing to hire or discharging because of lawful off-premises, nonworking-hours use of alcohol or tobacco, unless it interferes with dutiesThe statute "shall not be deemed to create a cause of action for injunctive relief, damages or other relief"RSMo 290.145

Missouri has no firearm protection for employees: a private employer may bar employees from carrying concealed firearms on its property (RSMo 571.107.1(15)).

For military members, the federal USERRA statute also bars denying "retention in employment" on the basis of service (38 U.S.C. 4311(a)). RSMo 290.145 names only alcohol and tobacco. For medical marijuana cardholders, the Missouri Constitution bars an employer from firing or otherwise penalizing a person because of their status as a qualifying patient or primary caregiver with a valid identification card, including legal off-premises use during nonworking hours, or, for a patient with a valid card, a positive test, unless they used or were under the influence at work or during work hours, compliance would cost the employer a federal monetary or licensing benefit, or the position is one where legal use affects in any manner the person's ability to do the job or the safety of others, or conflicts with a bona fide occupational qualification (Mo. Const. art. XIV, sec. 1.7(15)). Employers may still discipline employees for working under the influence. This page did not find a similar protection for adult (non-medical) use.

Paid sick leave is gone. The Proposition A paid sick leave law (RSMo 290.600 to 290.642), including its retaliation ban, was repealed by 2025 legislation (H.B. 567 et al.) effective August 28, 2025, according to the Missouri Revisor of Statutes. Missouri now has no paid sick leave statute of its own.

Federal law adds protections of its own: a 30-day deadline for an OSHA safety-retaliation complaint (29 U.S.C. 660(c)(2)), a six-month deadline for an unfair labor practice charge over protected concerted activity (29 U.S.C. 160(b)), and two years (three if willful) to sue over Family and Medical Leave Act retaliation (29 U.S.C. 2617(c)).

Deadlines for a Missouri wrongful termination claim

ClaimDeadlineSource
Human Rights Act complaint with MCHR180 days from the alleged act; a "jurisdictional condition precedent" to suingRSMo 213.075.1
Human Rights Act lawsuit90 days from the MCHR notification letter, and no later than two years after the alleged cause occurred or its reasonable discoveryRSMo 213.111.1
EEOC charge (Title VII, ADA, ADEA)300 days from the date of alleged harmEEOC Kansas City and St. Louis office pages
Federal lawsuit after an EEOC right-to-sue notice90 days42 U.S.C. 2000e-5(f)(1)
Service letter lawsuitTwo yearsRSMo 516.140
Jury-service firing90 days from dischargeRSMo 494.460
Public-employee whistleblower (105.055)One yearRSMo 105.055.5, .7
Whistleblower's Protection Act (285.575) and workers' comp retaliation (287.780)Neither section states a deadline, and this page did not find a decision fixing oneGet legal advice promptly

Deadlines to file (Missouri wrongful termination)

A late MCHR complaint is a complete defense the employer can raise at any time (RSMo 213.075.1), so the 180-day deadline is the one to watch.

Where to file

Missouri Commission on Human Rights (MCHR). The Commission sits in the Department of Labor and Industrial Relations. Its file a complaint page says that to file a discrimination complaint "you may first take the Discrimination Complaint Assessment," a short series of up to four questions about whether MCHR has jurisdiction. Intake is also available at (573) 751-3325, the toll-free complaint hotline 1-877-781-4236, or MCHRIntake@labor.mo.gov. The page states: "Complaints under the Missouri Human Rights Act must be filed with the MCHR within 180 days of the alleged discrimination. Federal law allows 300 days for filing employment discrimination complaints with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission."

State civil rights agency (Missouri wrongful termination)

Getting to court. The complaint must be verified and in writing (RSMo 213.075.1). MCHR issues a right-to-sue letter on the complainant's written request once 180 days have passed from filing without the Commission finishing its processing (RSMo 213.111.1). The letter ends MCHR's proceedings and bars a new complaint on the same practice. You then have 90 days from the letter, and no more than two years from the alleged act, to sue.

EEOC and dual filing. A complaint filed with the EEOC or another federal agency with a work-sharing or deferral agreement, or with a local commission the MCHR has certified as substantially equivalent, "shall be deemed filed with the commission" on the date that agency or local commission receives it (RSMo 213.075.2). The EEOC's Kansas City and St. Louis offices both say an individual in Missouri has "300 days from the date of alleged harm" to file a charge against an employer with 15 or more employees (20 or more for age). For smaller employers, those offices direct charges to the appropriate state or local agency within the time limits set by state or local law, and they name the State of Missouri and the cities of St. Louis and Kansas City. The state period is the 180 days in RSMo 213.075.1. Kansas City and St. Louis have their own ordinances, covering employers with six or more employees and adding sexual orientation and gender identity. A Kansas City complaint must be filed within 180 days after the practice could have been discovered with reasonable diligence (Kansas City Code of Ordinances 38-23), and a St. Louis complaint within 180 days after the practice occurred or ended (St. Louis Revised Code 3.44.090).

Because the Missouri deadline is 180 days and the federal one is 300, file early enough to meet the shorter one if you want to keep the state claim.

What a court can award

Under RSMo 213.111.2, a court may award "actual and punitive damages," injunctive relief, costs and reasonable attorney fees to the prevailing party; a prevailing employer gets fees only if the case was "without foundation." There is a right to a jury trial (213.111.3).

The Act caps the combined total of actual damages (including future pecuniary losses and emotional distress) and punitive damages. Under RSMo 213.111.4, that total "shall not exceed for each complaining party: (1) Actual back pay and interest on back pay; and (2)" an amount set by the employer's size in each of 20 or more calendar weeks in the current or preceding calendar year:

Employer size (statute's wording)Cap added to back pay and interest
More than five and fewer than 101 employees$50,000
More than 100 and fewer than 201 employees$100,000
More than 200 and fewer than 501 employees$200,000
More than 500 employees$500,000

The federal combined cap under 42 U.S.C. 1981a(b)(3) is lower at the top, $300,000 for employers with more than 500 employees.

Your service letter

Missouri's service letter statute, RSMo 290.140, applies to a corporation doing business in Missouri with seven or more employees. An employee with at least 90 days of service who is discharged or quits may request, "in writing by certified mail to the superintendent, manager or registered agent ... with specific reference to the statute," a letter about their service, within a reasonable time "but not later than one year" after leaving. Within 45 days of receiving the request, the corporation must issue a signed letter "setting forth the nature and character of service rendered ... and the duration thereof, and truly stating for what cause, if any, such employee was discharged or voluntarily quit."

A violation can lead to compensatory damages, and to nominal and punitive damages if no letter is issued. The suit must be filed within two years (RSMo 516.140). The statute applies only to corporations. This page did not identify a Missouri statute giving private employees access to their personnel file.

Practical steps after a firing in Missouri

Mark the 180-day MCHR deadline on a calendar the day you are fired. Write down the dates, who decided, the reason given, and any complaint, report, workers' comp claim or jury summons that came before the firing. If you worked at least 90 days for a covered corporation, a certified-mail request under RSMo 290.140 gets you the stated reason in writing.

Do not sign a release or separation agreement before reading it; our Missouri severance pay laws page explains those agreements, and Missouri final paycheck laws covers your last wages.

Recent changes

  • 2025 H.B. 567: repealed the Proposition A paid sick leave sections (RSMo 290.600 to 290.642), effective August 28, 2025, as the Missouri Revisor of Statutes shows.
  • Chapter 213 unchanged since 2017: the Revisor's chapter 213 table of contents, checked October 10, 2026, shows every section's current version dated 2017 or earlier. RSMo 285.575 has been in effect since August 28, 2017, and RSMo 287.780 is from 2017 S.B. 66. The Revisor does not show enacted changes that have not yet taken effect.

Disclaimer: This article provides general legal information about Missouri wrongful termination law (the at-will rule, the Missouri Human Rights Act, RSMo chapter 213, the Whistleblower's Protection Act, RSMo 285.575, and related statutes) and the federal laws that apply in Missouri. It is not legal advice. The information was verified on October 10, 2026. For advice about your situation, contact the Missouri Commission on Human Rights, the EEOC, a legal aid office or a lawyer licensed in Missouri.

Last updated: October 10, 2026.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I sue for wrongful termination in Missouri?

Only when the firing broke a specific statute, such as the Missouri Human Rights Act (RSMo 213.055), the Whistleblower's Protection Act (RSMo 285.575) or the workers' compensation retaliation statute (RSMo 287.780). Missouri treats those statutes as the exclusive remedies for employment claims (RSMo 213.070.2).

What is the deadline to file a discrimination complaint in Missouri?

A verified complaint must be filed with the Missouri Commission on Human Rights within 180 days of the alleged act (RSMo 213.075.1). An EEOC charge in Missouri has a separate 300-day deadline, and an EEOC filing is deemed filed with the Commission where a work-sharing agreement exists (RSMo 213.075.2).

Do I have to go to the MCHR before suing in Missouri?

Yes, for a Human Rights Act claim. You need a right-to-sue letter, which the Commission issues on written request after 180 days, and then you must sue within 90 days of the letter and no later than two years after the alleged act (RSMo 213.111.1).

Is sexual orientation protected at work in Missouri?

It is not listed in RSMo 213.055, but the Missouri Supreme Court held in Lampley v. Missouri Commission on Human Rights (2019) that a firing based on sex stereotypes can support a sex-discrimination claim under the Act. Kansas City and St. Louis ordinances bar firing because of sexual orientation or gender identity at employers with six or more employees, with 180-day complaint deadlines. Federal Title VII bars firing someone for being gay or transgender at employers with 15 or more employees (Bostock v. Clayton County, 2020), and the EEOC deadline in Missouri is 300 days.

How much can I recover under the Missouri Human Rights Act?

Actual and punitive damages combined are capped at back pay and interest plus an amount from $50,000 (more than five and fewer than 101 employees) to $500,000 (more than 500 employees) (RSMo 213.111.4). This page does not estimate what any claim is worth.

Does my employer have to tell me why I was fired in Missouri?

If you worked at least 90 days for a corporation with seven or more employees, a certified-mail request referencing RSMo 290.140, sent within one year, requires a letter within 45 days that truly states the cause of discharge.

Can I be fired for jury duty in Missouri?

No. RSMo 494.460 bars it, and a discharged employee may sue within 90 days of discharge for lost wages and other damages, reinstatement and attorney fees.

Does Missouri still have paid sick leave?

No. The Proposition A paid sick leave sections (RSMo 290.600 to 290.642) were repealed effective August 28, 2025, so their retaliation protection no longer applies.

Updates

Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources

Sources and References

  1. RSMo 213.055, unlawful employment practices(revisor.mo.gov).gov
  2. RSMo 213.010, definitions (Missouri Human Rights Act)(revisor.mo.gov).gov
  3. RSMo 213.075, complaint procedure(revisor.mo.gov).gov
  4. RSMo 213.070, additional unlawful practices and exclusive remedy(revisor.mo.gov).gov
  5. RSMo 285.575, Whistleblower's Protection Act(revisor.mo.gov).gov
  6. 42 U.S.C. 2000e, Title VII definitions(law.cornell.edu)
  7. 42 U.S.C. 12111, ADA definitions(law.cornell.edu)
  8. 29 U.S.C. 630, ADEA definitions(law.cornell.edu)
  9. Bostock v. Clayton County, 590 U.S. 644 (2020)(www.supremecourt.gov).gov
  10. RSMo 213.111, civil action and damages(revisor.mo.gov).gov
  11. RSMo 213.101, construction of chapter(revisor.mo.gov).gov
  12. RSMo 105.055, state employee whistleblower protection(revisor.mo.gov).gov
  13. RSMo 287.780, workers' compensation retaliation(revisor.mo.gov).gov
  14. RSMo 494.460, juror employment protection(revisor.mo.gov).gov
  15. RSMo 115.639, time off to vote(revisor.mo.gov).gov
  16. RSMo 41.730, militia members employment protection(revisor.mo.gov).gov
  17. RSMo 290.145, off-duty alcohol and tobacco use(revisor.mo.gov).gov
  18. 38 U.S.C. 4311, USERRA discrimination prohibited(law.cornell.edu)
  19. RSMo 290.600 (repealed), paid sick leave(revisor.mo.gov).gov
  20. RSMo 290.642 (repealed), paid sick leave(revisor.mo.gov).gov
  21. 29 U.S.C. 660, OSH Act section 11(c)(law.cornell.edu)
  22. 29 U.S.C. 160, NLRB unfair labor practice charges(law.cornell.edu)
  23. 29 U.S.C. 2617, FMLA enforcement(law.cornell.edu)
  24. EEOC Kansas City Area Office, timeliness(www.eeoc.gov).gov
  25. EEOC St. Louis District Office, timeliness(www.eeoc.gov).gov
  26. 42 U.S.C. 2000e-5, Title VII enforcement provisions(law.cornell.edu)
  27. RSMo 290.140, service letter(revisor.mo.gov).gov
  28. Missouri Commission on Human Rights, file a complaint(labor.mo.gov).gov
  29. 42 U.S.C. 1981a, damages in cases of intentional discrimination(law.cornell.edu)
  30. RSMo chapter 213, table of contents(revisor.mo.gov).gov
  31. Mo. Const. art. XIV, sec. 1 (medical marijuana; subsec. 7(15) employment)(revisor.mo.gov).gov
  32. RSMo 41.1000, Civil Air Patrol members(revisor.mo.gov).gov
  33. RSMo 290.525, minimum wage violations(revisor.mo.gov).gov
  34. RSMo 285.630, domestic or sexual violence leave(revisor.mo.gov).gov
  35. RSMo 571.107, concealed carry restrictions(revisor.mo.gov).gov
  36. Kansas City Code of Ordinances ch. 38, civil rights (38-1, 38-23, 38-103)(library.municode.com)
  37. St. Louis Revised Code ch. 3.44, civil rights enforcement agency (3.44.010, 3.44.080, 3.44.090)(library.municode.com)
  38. Lampley v. Missouri Commission on Human Rights, 570 S.W.3d 16 (Mo. banc 2019)(static.case.law)
  39. Johnson v. McDonnell Douglas Corp., 745 S.W.2d 661 (Mo. banc 1988)(static.case.law)
  40. Fleshner v. Pepose Vision Institute, P.C., 304 S.W.3d 81 (Mo. banc 2010)(static.case.law)
  41. Margiotta v. Christian Hospital Northeast Northwest, 315 S.W.3d 342 (Mo. banc 2010)(static.case.law)
  42. Daugherty v. City of Maryland Heights, 231 S.W.3d 814 (Mo. banc 2007)(static.case.law)
Share:

Paid attorney referral. RecordingLaw may receive compensation when you use an attorney-help link. RecordingLaw is not a law firm. Submitting a request does not guarantee that an attorney will accept your case and does not create an attorney-client relationship.