Previous Employer going after me for "bonus"

[people_eater]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Minnesota

Thank you for reading this.

In January I started working for a company that offered me a $2000 "new hire bonus", which gave me $1000 after 90 days with the company, and the other $1000 after 180 days with the company.
The bonus was contingent on me staying with the company, and it stated that if I left the company prior to being with the company for a year, I would have to pay back tiered portions of the bonus.

Well I got my first bonus in April (it ended up being about $650 after taxes) and a couple weeks later (end of April/Beginning of May) I was told that my location is closing and I would be laid off.
One of my first concerns was this bonus, I was worried I would have to pay it back. I called HR and spoke with someone about it, and they told me that because I would be leaving due to position elimination, I would not have to pay it back.

When we were told we would be losing our jobs, we were given information about how if we need time off to interview elsewhere, that they would be accommodating, that type of thing.

Anyway, I find a new job, put in my notice, on my "resignation" form that they made me fill out, I put my reason for leaving as "position elimination".

Now I am a week and a half into my new job, and I get a letter in the mail requesting $750 for not holding up my end of the sign on bonus.

I have spoken with HR at the company and told them about how I was told I would not be responsible for this money, and how I would not have left the position if it meant having to pay it back. They told me that since I did not stay at the company until the actual date that the place was set to close, that it was not "position elimination".

I am pretty bummed about the whole situation, I moved across the state to take this job, and a big reason why I took this job was the sign on bonus. I probably wouldn't have been able to wait until the very last day of the place being open because then I would not have a job the following day. I have bills to pay, I didn't want to have to rely on the possibility of getting unemployment income.

I am wondering, do I have any claim on this money?
If I refuse to pay the $750, would they most likely take me to conciliation court or civil district court?

Any help would be great, thank you!

 

[justalayman]

I am wondering, do I have any claim on this money?

Not the way I see it. You self terminated your employment so per the rules in place regarding the bonus, you owe them. While everybody will understand your point about needing to find employment, it does not abrogate the agreement you would have to repay the bonus if you quit before the year was over.

as to what court? no idea. That is completely up to them.

 

[people_eater]

Not the way I see it. You self terminated your employment so per the rules in place regarding the bonus, you owe them. While everybody will understand your point about needing to find employment, it does not abrogate the agreement you would have to repay the bonus if you quit before the year was over.

as to what court? no idea. That is completely up to them.

So if this were you, would you just drop it and pay the $750? (even if the $750 was like most of your bank account?)

 

[justalayman]

I would attempt to negotiate a lesser amount.

 

[people_eater]

I would attempt to negotiate a lesser amount.

Just out of curiosity, how would that conversation sound?

"I feel like this is an unreasonable arrangement, I would be willing to pay $250." ??

 

[Zigner]

Just out of curiosity, how would that conversation sound?

"I feel like this is an unreasonable arrangement, I would be willing to pay $250." ??

Instead of telling them they're unreasonable, I would focus on the hardship it is causing you. The reason I say that is because they're really not being unreasonable by expecting you to abide by the agreement you entered in to.

 

[LdiJ]

Not the way I see it. You self terminated your employment so per the rules in place regarding the bonus, you owe them. While everybody will understand your point about needing to find employment, it does not abrogate the agreement you would have to repay the bonus if you quit before the year was over.

as to what court? no idea. That is completely up to them.

I completely disagree with you. The OP had no opportunity to continue employment until the year was over. The employee was given notice that employment was ending. There is no way in heck that I would advise the employee to reimburse the employer, nor do I think that there is any chance that the former employer would get anywhere with a small claims case, even if the employer was dumb enough to try.

 

[Zigner]

I completely disagree with you. The OP had no opportunity to continue employment until the year was over. The employee was given notice that employment was ending. There is no way in heck that I would advise the employee to reimburse the employer, nor do I think that there is any chance that the former employer would get anywhere with a small claims case, even if the employer was dumb enough to try.

The employee quit prior to when his employment would have ended. I see your point, but I don't think it's as black and white as you suggest.

 

[LdiJ]

The employee quit prior to when his employment would have ended. I see your point, but I don't think it's as black and white as you suggest.

Then we are going to have to agree to disagree...but I will tell the OP to NOT roll over and pay that money back.

 

[justalayman]

I completely disagree with you. The OP had no opportunity to continue employment until the year was over. The employee was given notice that employment was ending. There is no way in heck that I would advise the employee to reimburse the employer, nor do I think that there is any chance that the former employer would get anywhere with a small claims case, even if the employer was dumb enough to try.

the employee self terminated prior to the company's date of termination. That means he quit. That means he owes some of the bonus to be paid back to the employer. That is the agreement he made with the employer. Now, if he stayed until the employer terminated him I would agree with you but he didn't.

 

[justalayman]

Then we are going to have to agree to disagree...but I will tell the OP to NOT roll over and pay that money back.

so you are suggesting the OP risk being sued over the money? Where he would be required to take time off work (probably) and show up in court only to be told he owes the money? and then have a judgment on his credit record? and depending on the agreement, possibly legal fees as well.

 

[xylene]

A contract needs consideration. The employer benefits by retention, the employee gains cash and assurance of ongoing employment.

It would sure seem, that employer had breeched by no longer offering ongoing employment for at least up to a year, and that occurred upon notice of the layoff.

If they wanted or needed people to stay til the closing date, they should have used additional incentive carrots instead of the clawback stick.

There could be additional facts, documents and the contract's exact words that would change my mind.

 

[Nellibelle]

the employee self terminated prior to the company's date of termination. That means he quit. That means he owes some of the bonus to be paid back to the employer. That is the agreement he made with the employer. Now, if he stayed until the employer terminated him I would agree with you but he didn't.

The employer gave notice that the OP's position was being eliminated by the employer!! This ended any obligation the OP had toward liability of any bonus payment payback! The OP was perfectly willing to honor the agreement, but the employer made any further bonus payment per such agreement moot by elimiinating the OP's position.

It was called a 'New Hire' bonus' which would pay 1000 after the first 90 days (which the OP completed) and another 1000 after completing 180 days of work (which the employer effectively rendered moot by eliminating the postion). The OP isn't entitled to the 2nd bonus payment since the employer eliminated the position, but since the OP DID complete the first 90 days as a new hire, he should be allowed to keep the payment agreed upon!

I'll go with the common-sense displayed in LdiJ's post that expressed a belief the employer would get nowhere if litigated in Small Claims!

 

[justalayman]

Nellibelle;3338502]The employer gave notice that the OP's position was being eliminated by the employer!! This ended any obligation the OP had toward liability of any bonus payment payback!

oh really now. You are basing that on what?


the position was NOT eliminated when the employee left. It was scheduled to be eliminated. OP agreed to stay 1 year. They didn't. They chose the day and time of termination. That is why they are liable to pay the bonus back.

The OP was perfectly willing to honor the agreement, but the employer made any further bonus payment per such agreement moot by elimiinating the OP's position.

but again, the position had not been eliminated, yet.

It was called a 'New Hire' bonus' which would pay 1000 after the first 90 days (which the OP completed) and another 1000 after completing 180 days of work (which the employer effectively rendered moot by eliminating the postion). The OP isn't entitled to the 2nd bonus payment since the employer eliminated the position, but since the OP DID complete the first 90 days as a new hire, he should be allowed to keep the payment agreed upon!

well gee, if you are going to pull out the agreement, don't forget the part that says the employee is entitled to the bonus ONLY if they stay for 1 year. WHile obviously they would not be able to complete the year due to the cessation of business in whole, it is not within the discretion of the employee to determine how much less than a year they will stay and retain the bonus. Remember, the company was not bound to allow the employee to stay for a year but the employee was bound to stay for a year.

I'll go with the common-sense displayed in LdiJ's post that expressed a belief the employer would get nowhere if litigated in Small Claims!

so you really think they would sue in small claims court? Highly unlikely. If they are going to bring a lawyer in, even if the company can be represented by counsel in small claims, since it costs the same for the company to pay a lawyer to sue in small claims or general civil court, they are going to go where it best benefits them and that is in the superior court. It's a game played every day.

 

[justalayman]

A contract needs consideration. The employer benefits by retention, the employee gains cash and assurance of ongoing employment.

It would sure seem, that employer had breeched by no longer offering ongoing employment for at least up to a year, and that occurred upon notice of the layoff.

If they wanted or needed people to stay til the closing date, they should have used additional incentive carrots instead of the clawback stick.

There could be additional facts, documents and the contract's exact words that would change my mind.

so where in the contract was the employer bound to retain the employee for 1 year? Unless they were, there is no breach by the employer.