ADVERTISEMENT

Any employment lawyers around here?

UncleMark said:
It makes sense that he wouldn't be challenged as long as the most recent employer realizes they aren't going to get dinged, and that assumes they even get a notice. If I were Dunn, I'd remind them of that fact.
Click to expand...
He should still get a notice. I once got a notice from a guy who didn't work for us long enough to be on our account. But I honestly can't remember if I bothered to even respond. Probably not. Once I saw that our contribution was 0%, it went right in the Never Read Again File.
 
OK. Enough about Dunn. He screwed the pooch. Let's take on another potential case. It's a guy I know. We'll call him "Hank."

Hank is almost 57. Hank has been with his firm 7 years. Hank not only has never had a poor review, they've always been glowing. Unfortunately, Hank's position (department manager) seems tenuous given some recent changes. An aside, Hank also has a disability/impairment which occasionally forces someone else to handle isolated situations.

One day Hank is called in and given notice that his position is being eliminated, and he can have 4 weeks severance and assurances that they won't fight any unemployment claims. Sign here. Hank says, gee, at my age (hint #1) and with my impairment (hint #2) I'm not sure I'll ever find another position in my field (probably true) and as such I'd feel more comfortable with six months severance. They say, it is what it is. You have a week to sign.

If it matters, Hanks non-management duties will be absorbed by the 35 year old guy that Hank hired two years ago. Does Hank bite it and sign? Does Hank have any legal recourse? Hank's not kidding when he suggests that he'll likely not be marketable in his field at this point as he'd be competing with perfectly unimpaired 40 year olds.

This is hypothetical. So far.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mike41703
Hank Reardon said:
OK. Enough about Dunn. He screwed the pooch. Let's take on another potential case. It's a guy I know. We'll call him "Hank."

Hank is almost 57. Hank has been with his firm 7 years. Hank not only has never had a poor review, they've always been glowing. Unfortunately, Hank's position (department manager) seems tenuous given some recent changes. An aside, Hank also has a disability/impairment which occasionally forces someone else to handle isolated situations.

One day Hank is called in and given notice that his position is being eliminated, and he can have 4 weeks severance and assurances that they won't fight any unemployment claims. Sign here. Hank says, gee, at my age (hint #1) and with my impairment (hint #2) I'm not sure I'll ever find another position in my field (probably true) and as such I'd feel more comfortable with six months severance. They say, it is what it is. You have a week to sign.

If it matters, Hanks non-management duties will be absorbed by the 35 year old guy that Hank hired two years ago. Does Hank bite it and sign? Does Hank have any legal recourse? Hank's not kidding when he suggests that he'll likely not be marketable in his field at this point as he'd be competing with perfectly unimpaired 40 year olds.

This is hypothetical. So far.
Click to expand...
Is Hank a contract employee or at-will?
 
Hank Reardon said:
He is at-will.
Click to expand...
Hank should probably read the severance agreement very carefully, or better yet, hire a lawyer to read it for him, because "We promise not to contest any unemployment claim" is worth exactly the paper it isn't written on. If Hank is thinking that he might be getting fired because of his mild disability, he should absolutely not sign anything without having a lawyer read it first.

If the agreement does not impair any of Hank's rights to claim unemployment or sue for discrimination, then Hank's severance should be considered generous, because Hank's employer is under no obligation to offer any sort of severance whatsoever. But Hank can't know if his employer is being generous or tricksy without letting a lawyer look at the document.
 
Hank Reardon said:
OK. Enough about Dunn. He screwed the pooch. Let's take on another potential case. It's a guy I know. We'll call him "Hank."

Hank is almost 57. Hank has been with his firm 7 years. Hank not only has never had a poor review, they've always been glowing. Unfortunately, Hank's position (department manager) seems tenuous given some recent changes. An aside, Hank also has a disability/impairment which occasionally forces someone else to handle isolated situations.

One day Hank is called in and given notice that his position is being eliminated, and he can have 4 weeks severance and assurances that they won't fight any unemployment claims. Sign here. Hank says, gee, at my age (hint #1) and with my impairment (hint #2) I'm not sure I'll ever find another position in my field (probably true) and as such I'd feel more comfortable with six months severance. They say, it is what it is. You have a week to sign.

If it matters, Hanks non-management duties will be absorbed by the 35 year old guy that Hank hired two years ago. Does Hank bite it and sign? Does Hank have any legal recourse? Hank's not kidding when he suggests that he'll likely not be marketable in his field at this point as he'd be competing with perfectly unimpaired 40 year olds.

This is hypothetical. So far.
Click to expand...
Can you share what industry/segment Hank works in?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hank Reardon
TheOriginalHappyGoat said:
Hank should probably read the severance agreement very carefully, or better yet, hire a lawyer to read it for him, because "We promise not to contest any unemployment claim" is worth exactly the paper it isn't written on. If Hank is thinking that he might be getting fired because of his mild disability, he should absolutely not sign anything without having a lawyer read it first.

If the agreement does not impair any of Hank's rights to claim unemployment or sue for discrimination, then Hank's severance should be considered generous, because Hank's employer is under no obligation to offer any sort of severance whatsoever. But Hank can't know if his employer is being generous or tricksy without letting a lawyer look at the document.
Click to expand...

I'll let Hank know. Off the record, I don't think Hank would be fired specifically for his impairment, or for his age. It would be more a case of the overall department needing to lose someone, and Hank feels as if the music is going to stop and he's not going to have a chair. Because if you've got an eager 35 year old pitted against a 57 year old with one foot in retirement, who would you choose? Me too.
 
Hank Reardon said:
I'll let Hank know. Off the record, I don't think Hank would be fired specifically for his impairment, or for his age. It would be more a case of the overall department needing to lose someone, and Hank feels as if the music is going to stop and he's not going to have a chair. Because if you've got an eager 35 year old pitted against a 57 year old with one foot in retirement, who would you choose? Me too.
Click to expand...
Either way, I would recommend to Hank not to sign anything without having a qualified lawyer read it over. Hank wouldn't want to unknowingly sign away any rights.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hank Reardon
Hank Reardon said:
Hank is probably an IT Manager for manufacturing company of about 300 employees.
Click to expand...
You mentioned something about 4 weeks. Do you know if Hank has any idea if that's a realistic number at his shop (factoring in length of employment, other factors)?

Also, what would unemployment compensation actually look like for Hank if that time came? I've not dealt with that side of it in a while; what % of Hanks' base would that cover and for how long?
 
Thyrsis said:
You mentioned something about 4 weeks. Do you know if Hank has any idea if that's a realistic number at his shop (factoring in length of employment, other factors)?

Also, what would unemployment compensation actually look like for Hank if that time came? I've not dealt with that side of it in a while; what % of Hanks' base would that cover and for how long?
Click to expand...

State unemployment usually maxes out at $425 a week for 26 weeks. Depending on the state on the length.
 
Thyrsis said:
You mentioned something about 4 weeks. Do you know if Hank has any idea if that's a realistic number at his shop (factoring in length of employment, other factors)?

Also, what would unemployment compensation actually look like for Hank if that time came? I've not dealt with that side of it in a while; what % of Hanks' base would that cover and for how long?
Click to expand...

I can't answer either question. I've never once looked into unemployment and have no idea how much a person is eligible for and how it is calculated. A quick google search suggests $390 a week is the max in Indiana, but I don't know how you qualify for the max. Hank said he'd rather not be too specific but that's probably less than 25% of Hank's gross.

Hank is only thinking ahead here. Hank is allegedly still employed.
 
Hank Reardon said:
I can't answer either question. I've never once looked into unemployment and have no idea how much a person is eligible for and how it is calculated. A quick google search suggests $390 a week is the max in Indiana, but I don't know how you qualify for the max. Hank said he'd rather not be too specific but that's probably less than 25% of Hank's gross.

Hank is only thinking ahead here. Hank is allegedly still employed.
Click to expand...
In Indiana, your max is 47% of what you earn or $390, whichever is less.
 
Hank Reardon said:
It was steel. Not coal.
Click to expand...
giphy.gif
 
I've got a younger brother (57 yo) that reminds me of Hank. Large area manager for years for a well know telecom. Lost his job a year ago when the company went on a buying spree, overextended themselves, and then eliminated a whole layer of management company-wide (nationally) to cut costs. He's well enough off, has no debt, and lives frugally, but won't entertain any position that pays less than a certain amount. It's a damn high amount, as far as I'm concerned. But for him it's like keeping score, and he doesn't want to admit he's no longer at the top of his game.
 
Hank Reardon said:
I can't answer either question. I've never once looked into unemployment and have no idea how much a person is eligible for and how it is calculated. A quick google search suggests $390 a week is the max in Indiana, but I don't know how you qualify for the max. Hank said he'd rather not be too specific but that's probably less than 25% of Hank's gross.

Hank is only thinking ahead here. Hank is allegedly still employed.
Click to expand...
Yeah, if the descriptions about UI above are accurate, it's why frankly I don't put a lot of thought into the unemployment piece. That's a fine very short term pick-me up, but not a difference maker for any serious planning Hank's going to do.

I hear what Hank is saying and I think he probably gets it. There's probably not a lot of lawyering that's going to matter unless the facts shake out pretty well and make it uglier for the company. But that doesn't mean with some additional conversation it can't come out more lucrative.

That's obviously said without knowing any of the meaningful facts and, per Goat's comment above, not lawyerly advice. Just feeling your thoughts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hank Reardon and TheOriginalHappyGoat
UncleMark said:
I've got a younger brother (57 yo) that reminds me of Hank. Large area manager for years for a well know telecom. Lost his job a year ago when the company went on a buying spree, overextended themselves, and then eliminated a whole layer of management company-wide (nationally) to cut costs. He's well enough off, has no debt, and lives frugally, but won't entertain any position that pays less than a certain amount. It's a damn high amount, as far as I'm concerned. But for him it's like keeping score, and he doesn't want to admit he's no longer at the top of his game.
Click to expand...
For both Hank and your brother, I wonder what the gig economy (or something like it) might look like in the IT field. As unappealing as it probably sounds, and despite some likely shortcomings, I wonder what the upside might look like.
 
Thyrsis said:
That's obviously said without knowing any of the meaningful facts and, per Goat's comment above, not lawyerly advice. Just feeling your thoughts.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I hate the fact that we feel obligated to keep saying this, but just for the record, nothing I said in this thread should be construed as legal advice for hypothetical Hank.
 
Thyrsis said:
For both Hank and your brother, I wonder what the gig economy (or something like it) might look like in the IT field. As unappealing as it probably sounds, and despite some likely shortcomings, I wonder what the upside might look like.
Click to expand...
I have no idea. Kid brother is not an IT guy, he's been in sales management and operations for telecoms of one stripe or another. He's been a couple steps below C-level with big names most of his career. Made a couple fortunes in cable TV and with ISPs, and lost a couple through divorce and Katrina. He's diligently looking, and considering hanging out his own shingle or buying into something, but nothing doing so far. Again, he's got his sights damn high, and the targets are few and far between. I've suggested that his current place and station in life no longer require that high of an income, but it's not for me to tell him what he should do for the next ten or fifteen years he plans on working.
 
Dunn_IU said:
Interesting. So companies pay the full unemployment costs for employees they lay off or fire? I was going to give him a letter something like "To confirm our conversation yesterday I'm leaving the company and my last day will be Feb 23". That doesn't say I resigned but maybe it's not what he's looking for. If I collected full benefits for 26 weeks he'd be paying $425 a week for 26 weeks or $11K. If he balks at that maybe I should just ask him for a couple weeks severance it would still be cheaper than paying the full $11K if I just decide to retire and spend the next few months at the ball park while I'm looking for a new job.
Click to expand...
No, they don't pay the full amount, but they have to pay more if they have several claims or have big payouts from unemployment. The example I was told of years back was if a company has ex-employees gettting large sums in unemployment, the employer could see their payroll tax rates increase over 3-5 years. The increase isn't punitive, but like car insurance in that people who use it more, pay more.

Severance only delays when you can file for unemployment. I doubt he will just hand you money. Any employer would want you to quit vs having to fire or lay off. He is being a dick . Do what you want, but I would only quit if you already had a job or didn't want to get unemployment.
 
UncleMark said:
So is the hype about IT professionals like Hank being in high demand just that much bullshit?
Click to expand...

Depends where you are. Some locations aren't exactly IT hotbeds. Hank isn't going to move at this point, unless it's to a beach retirement house.

Thyrsis said:
For both Hank and your brother, I wonder what the gig economy (or something like it) might look like in the IT field. As unappealing as it probably sounds, and despite some likely shortcomings, I wonder what the upside might look like.
Click to expand...

That's actually how Hank got where he is. He was a 6 month contract worker, and got hired permanently after a couple of months. Hank isn't wild about doing that, but then again Hank isn't wild about working at all. Hank sees the finish line and just doesn't relish being bucked off the horse before breaking the tape. He'll be OK either way but better if he can stay mounted a little longer.

Hank doesn't understand these people that want to work forever because they're afraid they won't have anything to do. Hank can think of plenty of better things to do.
 
I was furloughed for 2 months last fall and being in retirement mode isn't all that great. The 1st week was fine, sleep in, no schedule, get in a good workout, plenty of rest. But soon you realize there's no more paychecks coming in and anything you buy or spend is coming out of your 401K, IRA, etc. After 59 there's no penalty but they take 25% upfront for withholding if you take a distribution. My wife is still working since she's younger and asking her for money isn't fun either if I want to avoid using retirement funds. At 66 I'll be happy to call it quits, take my social security and avoid taking out retirement funds if possible. But I'm not there yet and I can see those funds being depleted fast unless you get fully into retirement mode and stop spending money. And that's no fun. I'm not dead yet.

By the way, my boss didn't tell leadership I'm leaving today like he said he was. I think he's afraid of what lie he's going to have to tell them to make it sound like leaving was all my idea.
 
Dunn_IU said:
...By the way, my boss didn't tell leadership I'm leaving today like he said he was. I think he's afraid of what lie he's going to have to tell them to make it sound like leaving was all my idea.
Click to expand...

Which is exactly why I would request a meeting with someone in the leadership team, so that they know what he is doing. You don't have to resign to them...but I'm sure they will be interested to know that he is asking people to resign and offering two weeks severance...especially if they don't know about it.

Besides, if they know that you want to be there, if this boss continues to push like he is and they don't do anything about it, you might....might....have a case of some kind. Retaliation, harassment/hostile environment, wrongful termination...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Joe_Hoopsier
Couple thoughts from the corporate world. 1) We always offer people the option to resign. That way the person doesn't have to tell anyone in the next job interview that he was terminated. We will also then confirm to the next employer who does the background check that the person was employed by us and resigned. We believe it is a good thing to do for the ex-employee. 2) We always offer at least two weeks to everyone. We believe that it is a two way street. We ask for two weeks notice if someone is leaving and so we similarly will minimally pay two weeks for someone being fired. We think that, at a minimum is fair. However, in at will states, a company can offer nothing. 3) We usually pay more than two weeks in exchange for a full release of all claims. This just gives us certainty for a few extra bucks. 4) We also will not contest unemployment if they release us and resign. If a person makes us fire them then all bets are off.

We have never had a person be successful in suing us. We do all the necessary reviews, write-ups and documentation before we fire people or let them go. I have seen several people not sign the agreement, sue us and lose. It is sad that they turned down the severance in those instances.

Hank needs to remember that expensive old white males (which includes me) are not a protected class.

Finally, if everyone is honest with themselves, rarely is termination, or even restructuring a surprise. If it isn't a surprise to the individual, more than likely the company has documented its tracks pretty well. Hard to beat that.

I will say that protected classes of people are improperly terminated, but, as a percentage, that is few and far between.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: largemouth
Breaking news, just had a great telephone interview leading to a second interview on Friday. Apparently there are few people doing cost benefit analysis for moving business systems to the cloud. If Friday works out I could be working for them in 2 weeks including working half time from home.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Joe_Hoopsier
Hank Reardon said:
Depends where you are. Some locations aren't exactly IT hotbeds. Hank isn't going to move at this point, unless it's to a beach retirement house.



That's actually how Hank got where he is. He was a 6 month contract worker, and got hired permanently after a couple of months. Hank isn't wild about doing that, but then again Hank isn't wild about working at all. Hank sees the finish line and just doesn't relish being bucked off the horse before breaking the tape. He'll be OK either way but better if he can stay mounted a little longer.

Hank doesn't understand these people that want to work forever because they're afraid they won't have anything to do. Hank can think of plenty of better things to do.
Click to expand...

Our IT department is absolute dogshit. They are beyond worthless.
 
alax2 said:
Hank needs to remember that expensive old white males (which includes me) are not a protected class.
Click to expand...

Hank realizes this. He's not going to sue anyone, at least not without a better reason that he's described. I think he's just trying to get a feel for his bargaining position if it comes down to a game of chicken. And if he has no cards, well he needs to know that before he pushes all in with a bluff.
 
Hank Reardon said:
Hank realizes this. He's not going to sue anyone, at least not without a better reason that he's described. I think he's just trying to get a feel for his bargaining position if it comes down to a game of chicken. And if he has no cards, well he needs to know that before he pushes all in with a bluff.
Click to expand...

I like you Hank, we should start a business like a strip joint. Serve overpriced drinks and bang the employees before they can work for you.
 
alax2 said:
Couple thoughts from the corporate world. 1) We always offer people the option to resign. That way the person doesn't have to tell anyone in the next job interview that he was terminated. We will also then confirm to the next employer who does the background check that the person was employed by us and resigned. We believe it is a good thing to do for the ex-employee. 2) We always offer at least two weeks to everyone. We believe that it is a two way street. We ask for two weeks notice if someone is leaving and so we similarly will minimally pay two weeks for someone being fired. We think that, at a minimum is fair. However, in at will states, a company can offer nothing. 3) We usually pay more than two weeks in exchange for a full release of all claims. This just gives us certainty for a few extra bucks. 4) We also will not contest unemployment if they release us and resign. If a person makes us fire them then all bets are off.

We have never had a person be successful in suing us. We do all the necessary reviews, write-ups and documentation before we fire people or let them go. I have seen several people not sign the agreement, sue us and lose. It is sad that they turned down the severance in those instances.

Hank needs to remember that expensive old white males (which includes me) are not a protected class.

Finally, if everyone is honest with themselves, rarely is termination, or even restructuring a surprise. If it isn't a surprise to the individual, more than likely the company has documented its tracks pretty well. Hard to beat that.

I will say that protected classes of people are improperly terminated, but, as a percentage, that is few and far between.
Click to expand...
Quibble, but everybody is in a protected class.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheOriginalHappyGoat
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

G

the names on unforms thing ...

Replies
9
Views
598
TheHoosier.com IU Hoop Forum
go_iu
G
Joe_Hoopsier

Are there any Therapist on here?

Replies
32
Views
519
The Water Cooler
Ohio Guy
Ohio Guy
UTFO

Are there any lawyers on here?

Replies
9
Views
315
The Water Cooler
WhyisIUBBcursed
WhyisIUBBcursed
outside shooter

OT: anyone here undergone knee replacement surgery?

Replies
42
Views
936
The Water Cooler
UncleMark
U
Rags to Roses

Michael Penix - A letter to NFL GMs

Replies
18
Views
1K
IU Football Board
OpenWheels
O
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back