Amanda, one of Abigail's fellow workers at BOSS, was surprised to learn that her department's schedule was changed from a standard 8 a. m. to 5 p. m. day, with an hour for lunch, to a work day that began at 8 a. m. and ended at 6 p. m., and that included a two-hour lunch. BOSS was located in the far suburbs, and there was little Amanda could do during the two-hour lunch period. What especially upset Amanda was the realization that when she got off work at 6 p. m. and drove 30 minutes to pick up her child at day care, she would be at least an hour late for daycare and would have to pay a very costly penalty. There were no day care facilities closer to the job, so Amanda had little recourse. She raised this concern to her supervisor, and when she was told that the new schedules were going to remain 8-6 with a two-hour lunch, Amanda began a campaign to pressure BOSS to change that schedule back. She wrote letters to the local newspaper, and called a local TV station. When Amanda's employer learned of Amanda's actions, it discharged her under Employment at Will (EAW). Amanda filed suit for wrongful discharge, claiming that this was a public policy exception to EAW because it constrained her Constitutional First Amendment right to Freedom of Speech. Which of the following is most correct? a. Amanda will not win her lawsuit for wrongful discharge.
b. Amanda will not win her lawsuit for wrongful discharge unless the court decides that Amanda had legal standing to bring the case.
c. Amanda will win her lawsuit for wrongful discharge unless the court decides that BOSS had legitimate business necessity for changing the schedule.
d. Amanda will win her lawsuit for wrongful discharge.