Answers Posted By Scott Leah
Based on what you wrote, it is possible that you have a claim here against your employer under the Pennsylvania Wage Payment and Collection law. However, I would need to see the old policy and the new policy to properly evaluate it. Give me a call at 412-594-5551 and I would be happy to discuss this with you and perhaps arrange for you to get me the above documents.
posted May 1, 2017 11:34 AM [EST]
posted May 1, 2017 11:34 AM [EST]
Federal law allows an employer to calculate hours worked on 15 minute increments, and to round up or round down within those increments. In other words, they would round minutes 1-7 down to zero, while rounding minutes 8-14 up to 15 minutes. So if an employee works 6 hours and 4 minutes, they would get paid for 6 hours. If an employee works 6 hours and 11 minutes, they would get paid for 6 hours and 15 minutes.
The first question is whether your employer has a policy of paying in 15 minute increments or not. If the employer otherwise pays people for the exact number of hours and minutes worked, then the employer cannot choose to not pay you in that manner when you work over your normal quitting time.
If the employer does have a policy of paying in 15 minute increments, then it would be correct if it round down when you work 1-7 minutes (you suggest 7 in your question), but the employer also has to equally round up for minutes 8-14.
Also, if the employer has to round up, and those extra 15 minutes put you over 40 hours for the week, they must be paid a time and a half as overtime.
posted Apr 25, 2017 07:55 AM [EST]
The first question is whether your employer has a policy of paying in 15 minute increments or not. If the employer otherwise pays people for the exact number of hours and minutes worked, then the employer cannot choose to not pay you in that manner when you work over your normal quitting time.
If the employer does have a policy of paying in 15 minute increments, then it would be correct if it round down when you work 1-7 minutes (you suggest 7 in your question), but the employer also has to equally round up for minutes 8-14.
Also, if the employer has to round up, and those extra 15 minutes put you over 40 hours for the week, they must be paid a time and a half as overtime.
posted Apr 25, 2017 07:55 AM [EST]
If I understand your question, you were laid off on March 31st, and were told that that was also the last day of your health insurance coverage.
Without talking to you, I cannot give you specific legal advice. However, I can give you some general thoughts on this subject.
An employer is not required to provide you with coverage after your employment has been terminated. While some employers will allow an employee to keep their health insurance after termination where that month, or the next month's, coverage has already been paid for, they are not required to do so.
However, you may be eligible for continued health insurance coverage under COBRA (which, if you follow all time limits, will be retroactive to when your employer coverage ended). You should receive a notice of your COBRA rights from your former employer. If you do not, you should contact them to inquire about your COBRA rights. Note, however, that COBRA coverage is completely at your own expense. Your employer does not contribute to the cost of that coverage.
If you are not sure whether you are eligible for COBRA coverage, or you believe you are eligible for COBRA coverage, and your employer fails to provide you with notification of your rights, you should speak to an attorney.
posted Apr 4, 2017 08:22 AM [EST]
Without talking to you, I cannot give you specific legal advice. However, I can give you some general thoughts on this subject.
An employer is not required to provide you with coverage after your employment has been terminated. While some employers will allow an employee to keep their health insurance after termination where that month, or the next month's, coverage has already been paid for, they are not required to do so.
However, you may be eligible for continued health insurance coverage under COBRA (which, if you follow all time limits, will be retroactive to when your employer coverage ended). You should receive a notice of your COBRA rights from your former employer. If you do not, you should contact them to inquire about your COBRA rights. Note, however, that COBRA coverage is completely at your own expense. Your employer does not contribute to the cost of that coverage.
If you are not sure whether you are eligible for COBRA coverage, or you believe you are eligible for COBRA coverage, and your employer fails to provide you with notification of your rights, you should speak to an attorney.
posted Apr 4, 2017 08:22 AM [EST]
Answer to If my daughter does not get paid tomorrow can she contact UE and reopen her claim from October?
If your daughter does not get paid her wages, she can quit the company and re-apply for unemployment. It would likely be seen as a new claim, but she should be eligible as she would have quit for a necessitous and compelling reason - that they were not paying her for her wages. She might want to consult with an attorney regarding her eligibility.The amount of the UC benefits that she receives would be based on her wages over a period of time, so they would include the prior employer.
Your daughter will also have a claim against the company for the unpaid wages under the Wage Payment and Collection Law. She should either consult with an attorney about filing such a claim, or contact the Pennsylvania Department of Labor and Industry for assistance.
posted Jan 20, 2017 07:55 AM [EST]
Answer to Can I refuse to be sold to a franchise?
While I have not seen any the documents related to this transaction, so I don't know exactly what your situation is, I can tell you that typically where one business is being sold to another business, the seller employer terminates your employment on the date of the closing of the sale of the business, and the buyer employer immediately hires you the same day.However, yes, you may refuse any offer of employment made by the buyer employer and look for employment elsewhere. They cannot force you to remain employment by the new owner unless you want to.
But, keep in mind that you may not get unemployment in that situation. While the seller employer did terminate your employment, and not for any misconduct on your part, the fact is that you will have turned down suitable employment, most likely on very similar if not the same terms, and the UC office may find that you are ineligible for unemployment. If you decide to turn down the offer of new employment, you may want to consult with an attorney regarding your rights to receive unemployment compensation.
posted Jan 16, 2017 07:12 AM [EST]
I agree with Doris. You need to have all your employment documents reviewed. Generally, wages earned must be paid by an employer. But an employer can put certain restrictions as to when wages, such as commissions, are actually earned. That is why it is critical to have your documents reviewed by an attorney.
posted Jan 11, 2017 07:10 AM [EST]
posted Jan 11, 2017 07:10 AM [EST]
Answer to Can my employer tell me I can only take my vacation between April and September ?
Generally, yes. An employer can put reasonable restrictions on the use of paid time off to suit the needs of the business. For example, some factories close for a certain month of the year, and require all employees to take vacation during the plant shut-down. Other employers do the opposite, allowing vacation to be taken any time other than a certain period, such as the busy season for the employer.The caveat is that the employer probably cannot so restrict the use of paid time off so as to make it impossible for those days to be used.
posted Jan 11, 2017 07:08 AM [EST]
Answer to Can an employer not pay your PTO when you are terminated ?
That is correct. Employers do not have to pay accrued time off at termination unless there is a contractual right to such pay or the employer otherwise has a policy to pay accrued time off at termination.posted Nov 17, 2016 10:45 AM [EST]
Answer to Amendments of non compete
It may have changed the terms of the non-compete, but it may not matter. The issue is really whether the employer had the right to fire your wife. If she was employed at-will, the answer is likely yes. An employer can terminate an at-will employee for a good reason, a bad reason, an unfair reason, or even no reason. It just cannot do so for an illegal reason. In other words, even if the employer is wrong about your wife breaching the contract, it would still be able to fire her.If your wife had an employment agreement or contract with the employer, which provided for various basis for termination, then it would be a different story. In that situation, the terms of the contract would govern.
posted Nov 15, 2016 07:11 AM [EST]
It may depend on the type of sale this was. If your old company sold its assets to the new company, not the actual ownership of the business, then typically the old company would terminate all of its employees on the date of the closing of the asset sale and the new company would immediately hire the employees it wanted to hire. In that scenario, the old company would not owe its employees for their accrued but unused vacation, sick or PTO time, as Pennsylvania law does not require that those be paid at termination unless there is a contract or policy in place that requires that they be paid.
However, if the sale was a stock sale, in which the new company purchased the old company, not just its assets, then it should stand in the old company's shoes. Nothing changed for the employees, they remained employed by the same company, the company just had a different owner. In such case, their leave would not get paid to them, but should stay on the books to use. However, this is not the usual way that a business is sold, the asset sale above is more common.
If this was an asset sale, you need to look at your employment contract or employment agreement, if you have one, to see if it speaks to the entitlement to those things at termination. You should also look at the company handbook to see if it has one. You can also try to find out how employees who have left the company in the past have been treated - did they get paid for their accrued time off. If they did, you may have a claim that such was the company policy.
posted Nov 15, 2016 07:04 AM [EST]
However, if the sale was a stock sale, in which the new company purchased the old company, not just its assets, then it should stand in the old company's shoes. Nothing changed for the employees, they remained employed by the same company, the company just had a different owner. In such case, their leave would not get paid to them, but should stay on the books to use. However, this is not the usual way that a business is sold, the asset sale above is more common.
If this was an asset sale, you need to look at your employment contract or employment agreement, if you have one, to see if it speaks to the entitlement to those things at termination. You should also look at the company handbook to see if it has one. You can also try to find out how employees who have left the company in the past have been treated - did they get paid for their accrued time off. If they did, you may have a claim that such was the company policy.
posted Nov 15, 2016 07:04 AM [EST]