catr
07-29-2008, 11:58 AM
Background:
My former company (i left voluntarily) offered a tuition reimbursement program. It functioned as follows:
The employee submits a reimbursement request at the end of each semester/quarter detailing the costs associated with said semester/quarter. Further, the employee must sign the request stating that the employee understands the Ts & Cs of the corp policy in effect at the time. The standard turnaround time from submission to payment was about 3-4 weeks.
When I began my degree program (Fall '04) there was no retention/payback statement in the policy and I was fully reimbursed for every cent (about $10k/semester or about $27k/year). Not on the hook for anything.
Through 2005, the policy was unchanged.
In jan 2006, the policy added a 12 month payback clause stating that all TR $$ paid to me during my final 12 months of employment was to be paid back. The policy also ended the full reimbursement and capped the reimbursement at $7500/year. However, there was a grandfather clause that allowed for all employees that had begun their degree program prior to the start of 2006 to continue receiving full reimbursement throughout 2006.
In jan 2007, the grandfather clause was eliminated and the $7500/year cap applied to everyone.
My last semester was the spring of 2007 (the first semester governed by the jan 2007 policy) and totaled about $10,250. I submitted the request for that sum in mid April 2007, signing the form stating that i understood the Ts & Cs of the policy in effect at the time (namely that the cap was $7500 and that I understood the payback clause.)
As expected, I received $7500 in mid-May 2007 (the same time span as always between submission and receipt of $$).
In July of 2007, corporate changed the policy again for various reasons (most certainly it was enough executives complaining about the $7500 cap). The new policy stated that the corporation would pay up to $10k/yr for all people who submitted requests for more than $7500/yr. As in, they'd make up the diff for folks like me. Well, I was completely unaware of this change and just received $2500 in my account in mid-august 2007 with no letter stating as such or any communication of any kind. I never signed anything acknowledging that I understood the Ts & Cs of the new policy change in July (moving the cap back to $10k just for 2007). The $$ just showed up.
Situation:
In June of 2008 I left the company. The $7500 paid in mid-May of 2007 was more than 12 months prior to that so I wasnt worried about it, but the $2500 paid in august is under dispute.
Of course, I'm now receiving letters stating that I owe that money back based solely upon the 12 month payback clause. Can that clause stand alone or would the contract exist as a whole, as in the last request I submitted was signed acknowledging that I understood the entire policy where the cap was set at $7500?
The last request I signed was done assuming the corp would follow precedent and pay in May and that I'd only receive $7500. I acknowledged that I would be on the hook for that sum until May of 2008.
Does any of that matter or can the 12 month clause stand on its own?
My former company (i left voluntarily) offered a tuition reimbursement program. It functioned as follows:
The employee submits a reimbursement request at the end of each semester/quarter detailing the costs associated with said semester/quarter. Further, the employee must sign the request stating that the employee understands the Ts & Cs of the corp policy in effect at the time. The standard turnaround time from submission to payment was about 3-4 weeks.
When I began my degree program (Fall '04) there was no retention/payback statement in the policy and I was fully reimbursed for every cent (about $10k/semester or about $27k/year). Not on the hook for anything.
Through 2005, the policy was unchanged.
In jan 2006, the policy added a 12 month payback clause stating that all TR $$ paid to me during my final 12 months of employment was to be paid back. The policy also ended the full reimbursement and capped the reimbursement at $7500/year. However, there was a grandfather clause that allowed for all employees that had begun their degree program prior to the start of 2006 to continue receiving full reimbursement throughout 2006.
In jan 2007, the grandfather clause was eliminated and the $7500/year cap applied to everyone.
My last semester was the spring of 2007 (the first semester governed by the jan 2007 policy) and totaled about $10,250. I submitted the request for that sum in mid April 2007, signing the form stating that i understood the Ts & Cs of the policy in effect at the time (namely that the cap was $7500 and that I understood the payback clause.)
As expected, I received $7500 in mid-May 2007 (the same time span as always between submission and receipt of $$).
In July of 2007, corporate changed the policy again for various reasons (most certainly it was enough executives complaining about the $7500 cap). The new policy stated that the corporation would pay up to $10k/yr for all people who submitted requests for more than $7500/yr. As in, they'd make up the diff for folks like me. Well, I was completely unaware of this change and just received $2500 in my account in mid-august 2007 with no letter stating as such or any communication of any kind. I never signed anything acknowledging that I understood the Ts & Cs of the new policy change in July (moving the cap back to $10k just for 2007). The $$ just showed up.
Situation:
In June of 2008 I left the company. The $7500 paid in mid-May of 2007 was more than 12 months prior to that so I wasnt worried about it, but the $2500 paid in august is under dispute.
Of course, I'm now receiving letters stating that I owe that money back based solely upon the 12 month payback clause. Can that clause stand alone or would the contract exist as a whole, as in the last request I submitted was signed acknowledging that I understood the entire policy where the cap was set at $7500?
The last request I signed was done assuming the corp would follow precedent and pay in May and that I'd only receive $7500. I acknowledged that I would be on the hook for that sum until May of 2008.
Does any of that matter or can the 12 month clause stand on its own?
