Question...

My husband worked for a regional engineering firm (headquarted in Charlotte NC). He was hired to open an office for them in South Carolina. After 6 months of employment (June 2005), he was made a Vice President. In November 2005, the company notified employees of a change in their vacation policy. Upon termination/resignation, they would only pay up to 96 hours of accrued/unused vacation time. This policy went into effect December 1, 2005.

At my husband's 1-year review, he was "let go." This came as a total shock. At the time of termination, he had 155 hours of accrued vacation time. All of this 155 hours was accrued prior to the December 1st policy change. He was unable to take vacation due to company workload. Had he taken vacation, projects would have been unfinished, and he would have been reprimanded.

The company paid him 96 hours upon termination, but do we have any recourse to sue for the remaining 59 hours (total=$2400)? He was also due a bonus (approx. $20k). In addition, this employer gave him only 2 weeks' notice (he is a Professional Engineer--industry standard dictates 30 days), and our health benefits terminated at midnight on the day of termination. Great employer, right?

We would like to sue for the vacation time since he was unable to take it during his employment. Any ideas???

Thanks!

SC law does not require the payout of unused vacation time unless promised by policy or contract. If the policy is to pay out only 96 hours, you have no legal basis to sue for the balance. They could just as easily, and legally, have a policy not to pay any of it at all. It makes no difference when he earned it. There is nothing in the law that requires them to follow the policy that was in effect at the time he earned the time; only that they follow the policy in effect at the time his employment ends.