Forced to sign Leave of Abscence

[c5vettegeek]

What is the name of your state? Georgia
My employer is in California and work remotely in Georgia. Several of us in management who were sent a Leave of Abscence letter that is NOT our request. This is what the letter says:
"...letter will acknowledge your request to take an unpaid leave of abscence from <Employer>, for the period of August 16, 2007 through October 15, 2007. Your leave may be shortened or extended with the written consent of both you and <Employer>.
During your unpaid leave of abscence from employment from <Employer>, you agree to make yourself available to assist <Employer> at its request. On occassion, your services may be required to assist in a telephone conference or other small project.....You shall accrue a day's worth of comp time for any day during which you perform substantial services at <Employer>'s request. Your accrued 'comp time' is to be used no earlier than two (2) months from the date the services giving rise to comp time were performed. In the event of termination from employment, any unused accrued comp time will be paid in accordance with the policies for accrued vacation."
Other notes:
- health, dental and vision will be maintained for up to 3 months while on approved leave
- 401K and FSA will be suspended

The letter arrived yesterday and there is no time under which I, or my associates, have to sign it. Our pay ends today, and starting tomorrow we're assuming we will not be paid whether or not we sign the letter.

Again, the letter's introduction stipulates I/we (fellow managers) requested this LOA which is not true.

Here are some questions:
- If I don't sign the letter, is that grounds for automatic termination?
- If I don't sign the letter, and refuse to do any work during this period, can they terminate me? Or can they argue they are continuing to pay me by way of the benefits they will continue to pay for during this time?
- Are there suggestions for returning the letter with changes, but not signing it, to see terms can be negotiated?

Thank you.

[Beth3]

WHY is your employer sending you and your co-workers this leave document? Is what is actually taking place is that you and your fellow managers are being laid-off for two months???

Some background information on your situation will be of considerable help in trying to figure out what's going on.

[c5vettegeek]

The employer is short of funds and is seeking investors to spin this company out in the next two months, perhaps more. Our participation is crucial should investors have questions for the four of us while they do their due diligence. Meanwhile, the employer is keeping our China engineering office going since the employees there are all under one-year contracts.

It was told to me that this was supposed to have happened back on June 30th. Our parent company does not want to invest more funds to "bridge" us through this period. Our company develops technology products and we're in the middle of a product launch/development phase. In the meantime, we are unable to realize any sales revenue from the products we are developing since they are not ready for market.

You bring up the notion of being "laid off"....can that be implied from the language of the letter?

[hateworking]

[url]www.monster.com[/url]
[url]www.careerbuilder.com[/url]

[Beth3]

It seems odd to me that since the employer has decided to "furlough" you and the other managers for at least two months, that they're asking you to sign a statement saying that all of you have requested leave. They are prepared to continue your group health insurance benefits during this time, which is a good thing, but I do wonder why they are using this particular wording on the document. Perhaps so they can portray to investors that all of you are still "officially" employees (even though you're not being paid?)

I don't see any problem with any of you signing the document as long as you receive confirmation from your employer that this won't be used to contest any unemployment claims you make while you are laid-off, which in actuality will be your status. If it's their intention to have all of you return to work pending funding from the yet-to-be-found investors, you might want to ask them about "stay bonuses." That is, a financial incentive for all of you NOT to go and find other jobs while you're laid off.

[pattytx]

During your unpaid leave of abscence from employment from <Employer>, you agree to make yourself available to assist <Employer> at its request. On occassion, your services may be required to assist in a telephone conference or other small project.....You shall accrue a day's worth of comp time for any day during which you perform substantial services at <Employer>'s request. Your accrued 'comp time' is to be used no earlier than two (2) months from the date the services giving rise to comp time were performed. In the event of termination from employment, any unused accrued comp time will be paid in accordance with the policies for accrued vacation."

I'm assuming because you mentioned you're in "management", you're exempt?

The problem with this is, if exempt, that for any week in which you do any work, you must be paid your full weekly salary.

[url]http://www.dol.gov/dol/allcfr/ESA/Title_29/Part_541/29CFR541.602.htm[/url]

[c5vettegeek]

Beth3: What we've suspected all along, and why we are expected to make ourselves available, is to create a "facade" to investors. We mostly work out of virtual offices, with our true real estate being in China, so there's no office to visit to disprove our unemployment this as long as we talk with an investor on the telephone. Verbally, the CEO (whom I and the others report to) said we'd get back pay if we worked.....looks like that changed to "comp time" instead. And there's no incentive to entice from not looking.

PattyTX: That's a good point about being exempt. Based on other opinions I've received, it's been suggested we get paid at least for each hour we're asked to work, at our equivalent rate.