Contract from previous employment period

[bellman50]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? FL (Employer is in PA)

I started working with this company in 1990. When I was hired I signed a contract. I am a service technician and a majority of my work time is spent driving to calls. Due to the nature of the work though, my contract states that I am guaranteed a certain number of hours each week, even when I don't have any calls and I have to stay at home. The original contract that I signed in '90 stated that the number of guaranteed hours was 50 and that any hours in excess of that was overtime. In 2009, everyone was reduced to 4 day work weeks, so the way that they did it for us service techs was to reduce our salary by 80%, which equated to 42 2/3 hours each week. This was done by the signing of a new contract in 2009.

Then last year, the company was sold to a new owner. He dissolved the old Inc. and replaced it with an LLC, and I was laid off. I was given severance pay and was told to look for work elsewhere. I ended up being out of work for 2 1/2 months before they hired me back. The managers had all been replaced, and the manager at the time sent me a new contract in an email. The contract itself didn't specify anything about number of hours or an hourly rate, it only specified an annual salary and that I am non-exempt. The email that contained the contract included calculations for a 32 hour work week, which brought the hourly rate up from what it had been previously.

Long story short, I have been having a hard time getting them to pay me for any additional time worked. Every pay stub I get just says "SALARY" on it with the gross pay amount, which has always been the same (except for once, which seems to have been for two 40 hour weeks, even though my time sheets showed that I worked a total of 125 hours those two weeks from working over a weekend). There is never anything listed in the hours or rate columns, even though I am a non-exempt hourly employee.

So the guy who was my boss when I was rehired got reassigned and now the guy who I am dealing with is telling me that I'm still under the terms of the contract that I had signed in 2009, which means that I don't get any additional overtime until after I've worked more than 42 2/3 hours. Could this be possible/legal? I would think that termination of employment would render the previous contract null and void, especially since I had to sign another one when I was rehired.

One other tidbit, the 2009 contract specified a weekly salary, along with an hourly rate. The gross amount that I am getting on my biweekly paychecks is one cent less than the amount in the 2009 contract. Even though it's only a penny, it would still be a breech of contract if it were true that the 2009 contract still applies. I think this is all a ploy to intimidate me though. I've been asked to let him know by Monday if I'm in agreement with him that the terms of my employment are outlined in the 2009 contract, with the implication that if I don't agree, I will be fired. I will not agree to this charade, but I don't want to lose my job either. I've already been thinking about filing a complaint with the DOL over their violations of the FLSA (not paying for hours worked, not keeping proper records [paystubs], etc), but I was really hoping that it could be resolved in a more positive way. :/

Thanks in advance!

 

[justalayman]

now the guy who I am dealing with is telling me that I'm still under the terms of the contract that I had signed in 2009,

then tell him you want the pay from those 2 1/2 months you were off. If the contract is in force still, then it was always in force so, unless there is something in that contract that suspended your pay for some reason, then they owe you for the 2 1/2 months.


hang on for some of the HR folks. What is happening is not correct but it is beyond what I can explain adequately.

 

[cbg]

ANY time I see someone posting about the terms of a contract, the answer is the same - we cannot comment on the enforceability of a contract we have not read. You REALLY need to show it to an attorney in your state. There are limits to what a message board can do and this exceeds them.

 

[bellman50]

Justalayman: That's exactly what my son said when he heard that.

cbg: The contract is not really the issue. It's still "at will" employment, the contract simply was to set the terms of pay, which I have basically included in the OP. My main question is if it is possible for them to still be using the 2009 contract, even though I was laid off and then subsequently rehired and signed a completely new contract.

Your thoughts are much appreciated, and I'm wanting to go see a lawyer as soon as I get a chance. I just got back home tonight. I just wanted to get some general information beforehand.

 

[justalayman]

I understand cbg's hesitance in saying much as there are some issues that are very particular to exactly what your contract states.


I do not see how they can argue the old contract is in force though. I also wonder how much of a contract your new contract actually could be given the limited details included in it(or actually not included).

when it gets to OT, there are also exceptions for certain types of technicians under the FLSA so that needs to be reviewed by a lawyer as well. Even if they want to state you are non-exempt, if you can actually be treated exempt, unless your contract includes requirements for pay or such that they are bound, by the contract to pay different than a exempt salary position would, they can still treat you as exempt.

 

[bellman50]

when it gets to OT, there are also exceptions for certain types of technicians under the FLSA so that needs to be reviewed by a lawyer as well. Even if they want to state you are non-exempt, if you can actually be treated exempt, unless your contract includes requirements for pay or such that they are bound, by the contract to pay different than a exempt salary position would, they can still treat you as exempt.

As far as OT, the original contract for 50 hours had ten of those hours at time and a half. The 2009 contract had 2 2/3 hours at time and a half (because that's what you end up with when taking the dollar amount from 50 hours and multiplying it by 80%). The most recent contract specifically said that I am non-exempt. So there's not really any debate over whether I am exempt or not.

Also, my job just doesn't fall into the categories listed for exempt occupations. I do not manage anyone and it's not a computer related profession either. Approximately 80% of my time is spent driving, 10% on mechanical labor (hauling things around and pulling wires through conduits), 8% on simple electronics diagnostics and repair, and 2% on paperwork. So it really doesn't fall into any of the categories that I've seen for exempt occupations.

 

[justalayman]

If you were in Ohio, I would swear you are a friend of mine. The description of your work sounds a lot like his.


anyway, generally, anything over 40 hours must be paid at 1 1/2 times regular rate. In a salary situation it gets weird and I get lost in it so I don't bother trying anymore. Maybe cbg will at least explain the method of calculating OT in a salary situation with no promises it is applicable to your situation.