Terminated today

[billydee]

What is the name of your state? Alberta

Hi,

I had a meeting with HR and my manager today and they offered me a termination severance package. I have been off on sick pay since Sept-07 due to a sleeping disorder (apnea and insomnia). I'm not sure if I should sign the offer or contest it. It is a sizeable amount but I am not allowed to disclose the amount or I will lose it. I have one week to sign it.

The reason I am considering contesting it is that I was injured on the job and required surgery to repair the rotator cuff injury. My arm is about 80% better but it still hurts like heck when it is in certain positions. In my eleven years with them, I've had two back injuries which were covered by WCB. I am scheduled for an MRI in May but am concerned that by signing the severance offer, I would not be able to hold the company responsible for damages done to my back.

I am 57 years old and quite concerned about signing this offer. I look forward to all advice.

Thanks.

 

[cbg]

You evidently didn't see above where is says, US LAW ONLY.

 

[eerelations]

That said, I'm in Canada too, and can give you some advice.

Regarding termination pay, I can tell you what the minimum amount is that you should be given, but I need to know two things first:

1. The kind of industry this company is in.
2. Your job level (non-management, front line supervisor, middle management, director, or executive) - if you're not sure, then your job title.

Regarding accessing WC benefits after signing the release, does the release specifically state that if you sign/accept the severance pay, you will be forfeiting any entitlement to workers' compensation benefits in the future? If workers' compensation is mentioned anywhere in the release, maybe you could type out that sentence here.

Also, are you currently receiving the company's LTD benefits? I'm assuming the apnea etc. isn't a work-related - but if it IS, and you're receiving WC benefits for it, let me know.

 

[billydee]

Thanks for the reply, eerelations. Sorry for posting here but I couldn't find a similar site in Canada.

I worked for a major oil company in Alberta as a Heavy Equipment Operator. No where in the offer does it mention WCB.

I received short term disability for four weeks and then was told I was cleared to go back to work with my restrictions being: no nights and no operating heavy equipment and this is when they decided to terminate me as I could not fulfill my job duties. I had pleaded to return to work with eight hour shifts and in any capacity but that fell on deaf ears. Prior to that, I was receiving full pay minus the night shift premium.

My main concern is that of my back injury which WCB refused my claim due to supervisors claiming there were no holes on the dump that my truck hit which would have caused me to almost hit the ceiling had I not been wearing a seat belt. Every dump has bumps and holes in it and that is common knowledge in our industry. Why they would report there were none is beyond me.

 

[eerelations]

You're right, there isn't a site like this in Canada, which is why Canadians sometimes come here with their legal questions.

The law states you should receive at least eight weeks' severance/termination pay. However, given your age and disability, common law (judges' precedents) would dictate that you get somewhat more than this. If I were advising your former employer on what to offer you (and stay legal), I would say at least twelve weeks' pay. So if you're being offered at least twelve weeks' pay, I think you're okay. I don't think that suing would get you much (if any) more, especially given Alberta's current very strong labour market.

If your former employer is offering less than 12 weeks' pay, phone them up and tell them you've gotten legal advice and that you'll be happy to sign this release agreement immediately as soon as the offered amount increases to 12 weeks' pay.

Regarding the severance/termination pay itself - if they're offering it as salary continuance, say no, and ask for it in a lump sum. You are legally entitled to severance/termination pay in a lump sum.

Also, be sure to remind them that the lump sum should be taxed at severance pay rates (which are lower than regular income tax rates) - not all HR people are aware of this different tax rate, and Payroll people won't tax at that rate unless they're given specific instructions to do so. You are legally entitled to have your lump sum severance/termination pay taxed at severance pay rates.

Finally, your extended health and dental benefits (but not STD or LTD), if you have them, should continue through the severance/termination pay period. So if you're getting 12 weeks' pay, your health and dental benefits (again if you have 'em) should continue for 12 weeks' after your official termination date. If you're responsible for paying all or part of the premiums for these benefits (your paystubs will tell you this), you'll have to pay the company the total amount of your premium portion up front, otherwise they can legally cancel your benefits right away.

Regarding the WCB stuff, you can't be made to sign away your rights to WC benefits. I think your former employere has gotten some good advice on this and that's why the WCB hasn't been mentioned in your release agreement. After you sign this agreement you will still be free to pursue whatever WCB claims you may have - all of this will be between you and the WCB. The WCB will be free to deem your former employer responsible/not responsible for any injuries or disabilities you have, whether or not you sign this agreement.

I hope this helps. If you have any more questions - post away!

 

[Just Blue]

You're right, there isn't a site like this in Canada, which is why Canadians sometimes come here with their legal questions.

The law states you should receive at least eight weeks' severance/termination pay. However, given your age and disability, common law (judges' precedents) would dictate that you get somewhat more than this. If I were advising your former employer on what to offer you (and stay legal), I would say at least twelve weeks' pay. So if you're being offered at least twelve weeks' pay, I think you're okay. I don't think that suing would get you much (if any) more, especially given Alberta's current very strong labour market.

If your former employer is offering less than 12 weeks' pay, phone them up and tell them you've gotten legal advice and that you'll be happy to sign this release agreement immediately as soon as the offered amount increases to 12 weeks' pay.

Regarding the severance/termination pay itself - if they're offering it as salary continuance, say no, and ask for it in a lump sum. You are legally entitled to severance/termination pay in a lump sum.

Also, be sure to remind them that the lump sum should be taxed at severance pay rates (which are lower than regular income tax rates) - not all HR people are aware of this different tax rate, and Payroll people won't tax at that rate unless they're given specific instructions to do so. You are legally entitled to have your lump sum severance/termination pay taxed at severance pay rates.

Finally, your extended health and dental benefits (but not STD or LTD), if you have them, should continue through the severance/termination pay period. So if you're getting 12 weeks' pay, your health and dental benefits (again if you have 'em) should continue for 12 weeks' after your official termination date. If you're responsible for paying all or part of the premiums for these benefits (your paystubs will tell you this), you'll have to pay the company the total amount of your premium portion up front, otherwise they can legally cancel your benefits right away.

Regarding the WCB stuff, you can't be made to sign away your rights to WC benefits. I think your former employere has gotten some good advice on this and that's why the WCB hasn't been mentioned in your release agreement. After you sign this agreement you will still be free to pursue whatever WCB claims you may have - all of this will be between you and the WCB. The WCB will be free to deem your former employer responsible/not responsible for any injuries or disabilities you have, whether or not you sign this agreement.

I hope this helps. If you have any more questions - post away!

Since this IS a US Law Site only, why don't you two keep it to PM's...that way when someone is doing a serch of this forum they don't pull this thread up. And there are Canadian site out there...Labor Law will deal with Canadian issues...

 

[fairisfair]

Since this IS a US Law Site only, why don't you two keep it to PM's...that way when someone is doing a serch of this forum they don't pull this thread up. And there are Canadian site out there...Labor Law will deal with Canadian issues...

Which she has been asked to do, on previous occasions.

 

[Just Blue]

Which she has been asked to do, on previous occasions.

I didn't know that...Why doesn't she just go to LaborLAw ?...They handle Canada there...

 

[AlanShore]

You're right, there isn't a site like this in Canada, which is why Canadians sometimes come here with their legal questions.

The law states you should receive at least eight weeks' severance/termination pay. However, given your age and disability, common law (judges' precedents) would dictate that you get somewhat more than this. If I were advising your former employer on what to offer you (and stay legal), I would say at least twelve weeks' pay. So if you're being offered at least twelve weeks' pay, I think you're okay. I don't think that suing would get you much (if any) more, especially given Alberta's current very strong labour market.

If your former employer is offering less than 12 weeks' pay, phone them up and tell them you've gotten legal advice and that you'll be happy to sign this release agreement immediately as soon as the offered amount increases to 12 weeks' pay.

Regarding the severance/termination pay itself - if they're offering it as salary continuance, say no, and ask for it in a lump sum. You are legally entitled to severance/termination pay in a lump sum.

Also, be sure to remind them that the lump sum should be taxed at severance pay rates (which are lower than regular income tax rates) - not all HR people are aware of this different tax rate, and Payroll people won't tax at that rate unless they're given specific instructions to do so. You are legally entitled to have your lump sum severance/termination pay taxed at severance pay rates.

Finally, your extended health and dental benefits (but not STD or LTD), if you have them, should continue through the severance/termination pay period. So if you're getting 12 weeks' pay, your health and dental benefits (again if you have 'em) should continue for 12 weeks' after your official termination date. If you're responsible for paying all or part of the premiums for these benefits (your paystubs will tell you this), you'll have to pay the company the total amount of your premium portion up front, otherwise they can legally cancel your benefits right away.

Regarding the WCB stuff, you can't be made to sign away your rights to WC benefits. I think your former employere has gotten some good advice on this and that's why the WCB hasn't been mentioned in your release agreement. After you sign this agreement you will still be free to pursue whatever WCB claims you may have - all of this will be between you and the WCB. The WCB will be free to deem your former employer responsible/not responsible for any injuries or disabilities you have, whether or not you sign this agreement.

I hope this helps. If you have any more questions - post away!

Why I love America.

 

[eerelations]

Several people on this site have advised me that it's permissable to go ahead and help out Canadians posting here if I could, directly, and not via pm'ing, presumably so that other Canadian viewers might benefit from whatever advice I provide. In fact some people here occasionally notify me personally when Canadians stray onto this site, so that I can respond to their posts. This is because I (and others, it seems) believe that if it's possible to provide someone (even a non-American) with good, accurate advice, then we should do so.

However, I've noticed that lately (within the last few weeks) this endeavour has become very controversial. I'm not sure why this is suddenly so controversial - while I do understand that it can be somewhat irritating to move one's cursor over a thread title only to find that the content of said thread is not of any interest to the viewer (e.g., the poster states the name of his/her state is someplace in Canada), I am unable to understand why my responses to said thread cause the viewer any additional inconvenience.

 

[cbg]

If you are talking about www.laborlawtalk.com, I don't know of anyone there who can answer Canadian questions. eerelations is welcome to come there and answer any that might appear.

I don't have a problem with eerelations answering Canadian questions here. I point out to the poster that this is a US site and that the rules say US Law only because she can't be here all the time and if she's busy or away, the poster could be sitting around waiting for an answer that isn't going to come. But when she IS here and knows the answer to the question, what harm can it do for her to answer them?

 

[eerelations]

Thanks cbg, for weighing in on this suddenly-contentious issue.

What I don't understand is how my responding to Canadian OPs was OK with all/most members for several years and now suddenly it isn't OK with some members. D'ya think it's the poutine thing?

(BTW, in case it helps, I personally hate poutine! While I think gravy or melted cheese are each fine on fries, both together on fries - or on anything else for that matter! - is a bit disgusting.)

 

[cbg]

I'm 100% with you on that.

Though I personally prefer vinegar.

 

[You Are Guilty]

What I don't understand is how my responding to Canadian OPs was OK with all/most members for several years and now suddenly it isn't OK with some members. D'ya think it's the poutine thing?

Well, there's that, and then there's that really annoying way you say "about" that we have to contend with...

 

[cbg]

Well, if we're going to get started on annoying accents...