Separation with good cause attributable to my employer

What is the name of your state? Arizona

I intend to file for Unemployment Insurance in Arizona as a result of my recent separation from my job as a tipped server which I held for over three years.

At the time of my initial interview with the Dining Room Manager, I was presented with an Employee's Manual (Personnel Policies), and it was understood by me that I was to follow the provisions of the Manual. I also understood that my employer would follow and comply with the terms as well. I have researched whether or not this Manual is binding upon my employer, and I am confused.

1) Are the provisions of an Employee Manual binding upon the Employer?

During the course of my initial interview with the Dining Room Manager, and later at a subsequent discussion between me and a new Dining Room Manager (which occurred after I returned to work from an approved leave of absence), we discussed at length various matters, including a 30 hour work week (considered full-time by my employer) the total number of Lunch, Dinner and Sunday Brunch shifts that I now desired (6-7), and the elimination of consecutive double shifts. An agreement on all matters was reached between us, and I started working.

Recently, my weekly schedule was posted which contained 3 consecutive double shifts, and 50 hours of shift time. In addition, I was placed (On-Call) for what few shifts I had not been scheduled. On-Call means that I must block off the entire shift, sit idly by and not plan anything until my employer calls 1 hour before shift start, advising me whether I am to work or not. On-Call status was never discussed nor agreed by me.

I approached management (Manager, Assistant Manager and Dining Room Manager) about these issues, and received no response. I then prepared and delivered a Memo outlining the issues I believed worthy of a discussion and received no response. I then prepared and delivered a second Memo requesting a meeting by a date certain. Finally, all three met with me and at the end of a very short meeting, it was announced that there would be no changes. I was left with no options. They were advised that I was leaving with what I considered to be with just cause attributable to my Employer.

I am of the opinion that I have an unwritten Employment Agreement with my employer which, among other things, includes my rate of pay, the provisions of the Employer's Manual, the number of shifts I am to work, the allocation of my tips, the elimination of consecutive double shifts, etc.

2) Is my assumption correct? Do I have an Employment Agreement with my Employer?

3) If so, do the material changes by my Employer justify my leaving with just cause attributable to my Employer?

4) And finally, are you aware of any online access to the Arizona Administrative decisions relating to the issue of quitting vs leaving with cause? I want to research and prepare myself as much as possible in advance of the hearing.

Sorry this was such a long post, but I wanted to give you enough info at the start.

I am so glad to have found this website. I have learned a lot by browsing the forums. Thanks.

MissNancy

1.) No, not unless it is so incredibly poorly worded as to constitute a contract. Any half-way competent employer knows to include a phrase in a manual that states it is NOT a contract and that policies may be changed or modified at any time.

2.) No. Under that argument, an employer could never INCREASE pay, INCREASE benefits, give a more favorable shift, or in any way change the terms of employment even to the benefit of the employee. The initial terms of employment can't be a binding agreement when it comes to decreasing wage or benefits, but not a binding agreement when it comes to increasing them. You don't get to have it both ways.

3.) See above. However, I think it incredibly unlikely that this is going to qualify as "good cause to quit" for purposes of unemployment. In most if not all states, the standard to quit and still receive UI is incredibly high. If you are being subjected to sexual harassment and the company has done nothing to stop it after you filed a complaint; if you are being subjected to illegal discrimination under Title VII; if you are being required to do something illegal (not unethical; not immoral; ILLEGAL) as a condition of employment; if working conditions are unsafe by OSHA standards, then depending on your state law you MIGHT get UI if you quit. But for the most part, if you quit, you don't get UI. It is VERY unlikely that a dispute over hours is going to do it.

4.) I don't know offhand of any on-line sources such as you describe. I can't say they don't exist, but if they do I don't know where to find them.

I agree with cbg. (a) No, you don't have an employment contract. Your employer is free to change your work schedule any time they wish. (b) Quitting because you're scheduled for more hours than you care to work is not "good cause" under any State's UC regulations.

Thanks for all the replies.

Beth3 said:

I agree with cbg. (a) No, you don't have an employment contract. Your employer is free to change your work schedule any time they wish. (b) Quitting because you're scheduled for more hours than you care to work is not "good cause" under any State's UC regulations.

Click to expand...

I did not leave because I was scheduled for more hours than I wanted. I left, among other reasons, because I was scheduled for more hours than what my employer and I had previously agreed to.

I would not have accepted employment if I had known that all of the items we discussed and agreed to could be changed at will by my employer. Do you mean to imply that matters such as salary, previously discussed and agreed to, can be arbitrarily changed without the knowledge and consent of the employee? If so, why even discuss these matters at the interview? Do you have to work a pay period first and get your first check to have any idea what your salary is? And then, it might change again next week.


I don't intend to come off snippy here, but is employment in this day and age solely determined by the ever changing will of the employer?

I really appreciate your time in trying to explain this to me. Thanks so much!

QUOTE=cbg]

>1.) No, not unless it is so incredibly poorly worded as to constitute a
>contract. Any half-way competent employer knows to include a phrase in
>a manual that states it is NOT a contract and that policies may be
>changed or modified at any time.

I have read and re-read the Personal Policies (manual). There is nothing in it that states that it is NOT a contract, nor is there anything stating that policies may be changed or modified at any time.

Does this change your opinions?

No, not particularly. There is no legal intent for an employee manual to be used as a contract. Nor am I impressed by your argument that you're entitled to UI because your employer initially agreed to particular hours. Presumably you and your employer initially agreed to an initial wage, too. Are you telling me that if your employer offered you a raise, you'd turn it down because it wasn't what you initially agreed to? I didn't think so.

cbg said:

Are you telling me that if your employer offered you a raise, you'd turn it down because it wasn't what you initially agreed to? I didn't think so.

Click to expand...

Of course not. But I would expect that my employer would discuss salary adjustments, higher or lower, and any other term of my employment with me, and that we would reach a mutual understanding and agreement before any change was implemented.

And you used the phrase "offered you a raise." Doesn't this imply that there is at least a discussion and agreement?

I did not leave because I was scheduled for more hours than I wanted. I left, among other reasons, because I was scheduled for more hours than what my employer and I had previously agreed to

Click to expand...

I don't mean to barge in on this discussion, but I wanted to say this in reference to the above statment:

- Isn't that the same thing?
If you had wanted to work those extra hours you wouldn't have quit or complained.. so it was that you didnt want to work extra hours.

Nancy, the point is that the terms of employment are entirely within the employer's provision. They have NO legal obligation to discuss them with you or to get your agreement or approval. It is ENTIRELY up to them what your hours are, what your wage is, what benefits you get, and what all the other terms of employment are. As long as what they provide is within the limits of the law, that's it. If you don't agree to it, you are free to quit - but that's not going to make you eligible for unemployment. If they "discussed" the initial terms of employment with you, that was very nice of them, but it was NOT required by law and it does NOT obligate them to get your approval or permission before making any changes.

An employee manual does not, in the VERY large majority of cases, meet the definition of a contract regardless of whether it actually says so or not. For one thing, to be a binding contract, BOTH parties must offer some consideration. What consideration did YOU offer THEM in that manual?

cbg said:

Nancy, the point is that the terms of employment are entirely within the employer's provision. They have NO legal obligation to discuss them with you or to get your agreement or approval. It is ENTIRELY up to them what your hours are, what your wage is, what benefits you get, and what all the other terms of employment are. As long as what they provide is within the limits of the law, that's it. If you don't agree to it, you are free to quit - but that's not going to make you eligible for unemployment. If they "discussed" the initial terms of employment with you, that was very nice of them, but it was NOT required by law and it does NOT obligate them to get your approval or permission before making any changes.

An employee manual does not, in the VERY large majority of cases, meet the definition of a contract regardless of whether it actually says so or not. For one thing, to be a binding contract, BOTH parties must offer some consideration. What consideration did YOU offer THEM in that manual?

Click to expand...

What CONSIDERATION did I offer THEM? I promised to abide by the manual, (there was even an Acknowledgement for me to sign and date on the last page) and I agreed to start work, and in fact, did start work.

They offered me a job with certain terms and conditions, including the terms contained in the manual. I accepted. I have no legal background, but I have read or heard that an offer followed by an acceptance provides sufficient consideration for a contract.

Again, I want to thank all of you who responded to my post. I may not like the conclusions you reached, but I am certain that you are giving me your best advice.

I don't want to get into the rest of the issues with my former employer, but there were many others. No, just because it is evident that I am a female, there were no sexual advances involved. I wonder if that poster would have mentioned the subject to someone with a masculine username?

Whatever happens to me from this point on will only be better. A door closes, and another one opens.

Thanks, again.

I don't have a clue what you're talking about. Where did I even remotely suggest that there was anything sexual involved?

They offered me a job with certain terms and conditions, including the terms contained in the manual. I accepted. I have no legal background, but I have read or heard that an offer followed by an acceptance provides sufficient consideration for a contract.

Click to expand...

then you need to get your hearing checked. There are other elements required to support the finding of a contract, not the least of them Consideration and Capacity.

You have neither.

Of course not. But I would expect that my employer would discuss salary adjustments, higher or lower, and any other term of my employment with me, and that we would reach a mutual understanding and agreement before any change was implemented.

Click to expand...

And expectations have no legal basis for which to stake a claim.

Basically, you have no option in this case except to move on.

Some "Free Legal Advice" to those who use these forums...

First, let's clear this up.

cbg posted, "I don't have a clue what you're talking about. Where did I even remotely suggest that there was anything sexual involved?"

You might want to reread your post of 12/9 where you stated:
"If you are being subjected to sexual harassment..."

Now, for the "Free Legal Advice." I stumbled on this website and I see that they (whoever "they" are) claim to be "THE LEADING LEGAL ADVICE SITE FOR CONSUMERS." Wow! Free legal advice. Can't beat that, or can you?

I caution all users to read the fine print at the bottom of the page:

"The FreeAdvice Forums are intended to enable consumers to benefit from the experience of other consumers who have faced similar legal issues. FreeAdvice does NOT vouch for or warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any posting or the qualifications of any person responding... Information on FreeAdvice or a Forum should not be relied upon and is not a substitute for advice from an attorney licensed in your jurisdiction who you have retained to represent you."

So, what one might think is legal advice is at best, from CONSUMERS who might have faced similar legal issues.

Who are these people who oestensibly contribute a lot of their time and advice? View their public profiles. Here's what you get for some of those who replied to the question of MissNancy.

cbg...8,407 total posts, or 7.45/Day "HR Consultant"
BelizeBreeze...5,135 posts, or 27 posts/Day (no qualification designation)
Beth3...7,986 posts, or 7.97/Day (no qualification designation)

What is their motivation? Are they compensated? If so, by whom?

These are all questions you should ask when you rely in any way on "advice" from an unknown, unnamed source.

Now for some relevations. "MissNancy" is not a server; she is not female; and the original question and all responses by "Miss Nancy" were formulated by me. I wanted to see what kind of "LEGAL ADVICE" I would receive.

I AM an attorney with over 20 years of private practice experience, including time served as a Claims Examiner with the Unemployment Commission of my local state.

So, my "Free Legal Advice" for all of you users out there is to consult with an attorney on legal matters, not with some unknown posters with hidden backgrounds and suspect motivations.

You all have a nice day!

I was not suggesting that you were sexually harassed. I was giving you examples of some of the reasons that a state has approved benefits after quitting.

As for the rest of your post, I hope you enjoyed the game.