Bench policies for consulting companies

When the Employer Says One Thing and Does Another

You last sentence kind of suggests that employers in NY have to include at will language in employment contracts. They do not. A NY employer may enter into a contract for a definite term or which restricts the conditions under which an employee may be terminated. Provisions like these pull the employment relationship out of the at-will catagory. If an employer hires an employee, and if nothing else is said, the relationship, which is inherently contractual, even if there is no written contract, is assumed (a judge would say, presumed) to be at-will.

Your situation is interesting, but I believe, if you were to sue your employer, you would likely lose.

On the one hand, your case is something like a famous NY Court of Appeals case. In this case, the court found that the employment relationship was not at-will because the employer made certain representations to the employee before hiring, and the employee relied on the representations, going through the time and expense of relocating. However, one big difference between your situation and this famous case is that the employee in that case was fired almost as soon as he was hired, so that I believe a court would say the case does not apply to your situation.

You weren't with your employer long, so that some attorneys might disagree with me and say your situation is sufficiently close to this famous case. The only way to prove who is right is to file a lawsuit.

I have seen more than a few cases say that, after an employee is hired, an employer can modify policies, without any advanced warning or discussion with employees. If the employees do not like the policy, their remedy is to quit. In other words, I believe a court would say in your case, unless you have a written agreement providing otherwise, that the employer could change the bench policy, and fire you dispite the representations made to you at the time of hire.

Only yesterday I read a case in which an employee handbook said one thing in one place, but in another place said that the employment relationship was at will. Because of the at-will statement, the court refused to enforce the other handbook provision against the employer. In other words, in NY State, an employer can get away with lying to employees, as long as the employers recite the magic words of at-will employment somewhere, such as in a handbook, application or agreement.

I find this aspect of the employment at will doctrine very disturbing. However, I can also say that the effects of the employment at will doctrine are soften to at least some extent by other developments in employment law.

posted by David M. Lira  |  Sep 7, 2001 08:50 AM [EST]