With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". do not criminalize what Weichert and Merriam did in this case. See ante at 399-400, 677 A.2d at 171-172. Whether this is correct or not is not particularly relevant here. Certainly, the fact that a clear mandate of public policy is not incorporated in legislation making its violation a crime does not render it any less a clear mandate of public policy. Many cases of this nature, indeed most, involve a clear mandate of public policy the violation of which is not criminalized. See, e.g., Velantzas v. Colgate-Palmolive Co., 109 N.J. 189, 192, 536 A.2d 237 (1988) (observing that discharge of employee for requesting information relevant to suspected gender-based employment discrimination would be actionable under Pierce)-, Lally v. Copygraphics, 85 N.J. 668, 670-71, 428 A.2d 1317 (1981) (<HOLDING>). The Legislature’s decision not to criminalize

A: recognizing the cause of action
B: recognizing a tort action when employee was dismissed for filing a workers compensation claim
C: recognizing cause of action for retaliatory demotion for asserting workers compensation rights
D: recognizing cause of action under pierce for retaliate ry firing of employee who filed workers compensation action even though specific statutory remedy was available
D.