Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Position "eliminated" Exempt to Non-Exempt (IL)

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Position "eliminated" Exempt to Non-Exempt (IL)

    I live and work in IL. In November, I was told my current exempt position was being eliminated and I was offered a non-exempt position with a 13% pay cut. I took the offer because I couldn't afford to be unemployed. When I asked if I would be eligible for a severence package, the Director of HR told me no because I was offered a position within 15% of my previous pay.

    Question #1: Is this true according to IL Law? I was not allowed to see a copy of the company policy.

    I didn't use any of the 5 sick days offered to me from Jan-Nov. 2005 (when I was told my position was eliminated). I asked if this meant I still had 5 days remaining for 2005 and was told no because my new hire date was Dec. 2005 and I would be eligible for 0. I was not "hired" in Dec. 2005 only changed status in Dec. 2005 (my hire date was 5 yrs prior). My employer has a policy that non-exempt employees who do not use any of their 5 sick days are paid a bonus and all unused sick days for that year are paid at $50/day. (Also, a collegue at another location with my same job was allowed to carry over unused days to non-exempt status. This employee changed status the same time I did.)
    Question #2: Is my company correct in not allowing me to "carry-over" those sick days from exempt to non-exempt status? Again, I was not allowed to see the policy.

    Final question - I worked on a 5 member team (3 female/2 male) - the 3 females had their positions eliminated and the 2 males did not. We all had the same positions at different locations.
    Question #3: Is this a form of discrimination according to IL law?

    Thanks!

  • #2
    #1 - There is no law in any state requiring severance pay if your position is eliminated or if you are terminated for any other reason. It is strictly up to the company. Even the company policy can have exceptions.

    #2 - I agree that your employer calling your reassignment date a "new hire" date is, to put it bluntly, dumb. Unfortunately, however, sick pay is not vested wages in any state. So, unless you have evidence that your sick pay was not either carried over or paid out solely because of a protected characteristic, such as race, age, gender, religion, etc., illegal discrimination does not apply. Again, there is no law in this area that mandates that an employer follow its own policy, each and every time.

    #3 - I'm not saying it is impossible that there is not a possible case of gender discrimination here. The fact that the employees were in different locations means that you all were not "similarly situated", at least as far as this fact goes. However, you would need more evidence than what you have presented in your post for us to make an educated guess.
    I don't respond to Private Messages unless the moderator specifically refers you to me for that purpose. Thank you.

    Comment


    • #3
      Question #1: Is this true according to IL Law? I was not allowed to see a copy of the company

      Illinois law does not address this situation, nor does the law of most states. Severance is not required by law in most states (and even in the states that do require it, it would not be required in this case), and it is EXTREMELY unusual in any state for severance to be offered if you have turned down another position - no law in any state requires that. Extremely rare as it just does not happen. If you are ever lucky enough to be granted severance after turning down work, grab it and run before your employer realizing his mistake.

      Question #2: Is my company correct in not allowing me to "carry-over" those sick days from exempt to non-exempt status? Again, I was not allowed to see the policy.

      Again, this is not addressed under the law. The employer is not required to provide you with any sick days in the first place; in all 50 states it is entirely up to them whether to allow you to carry them with you or not.

      Question #3: Is this a form of discrimination according to IL law?

      Only if you have some evidence to suggest that they were retained BECAUSE they are male. The mere fact that the retained employees are male is not, in itself, in any state, evidence of illegal discrimination.
      The above answer, whatever it is, assumes that no legally binding and enforceable contract or CBA says otherwise. If it does, then the terms of the contract or CBA apply.

      Comment


      • #4
        Thanks for the input. I'll investigate further.

        Comment

        Working...
        X