In Kelecheva v. Multivision Cable T.V. Corp. (1993) 18 Cal. App. 4th 521, 527-528 22 Cal. Rptr. 2d 453, a supervisor was discharged for the sole reason that he refused to engage in union busting activity. The Court of Appeal readily concluded that the supervisor's attempt to assert a state law cause of action for wrongful discharge in violation of public policy was clearly preempted. ( Kelecheva v. Multivision Cable T.V. Corp., supra, 18 Cal. App. 4th at p. 528.) However, the court concluded as a matter of first impression that under the circumstances present there, preemption of the supervisor's contract-based claims was not required. "The United States Supreme Court has held that the NLRA does not preempt state court jurisdiction of state law breach of contract claims against an employer where the controversy presented to the state court is not identical to that which could be presented to the NLRB." ( Kelecheva v. Multivision Cable T.V. Corp., supra, 18 Cal. App. 4th at p. 530, citing Belknap, Inc. v. Hale (1983) 463 U.S. 491, 511-512 103 S. Ct. 3172, 3183-3184, 77 L. Ed. 2d 798.) The Kelecheva court concluded that the supervisor could present a state law controversy which was not identical to what could be presented to the NLRB.