Recoup 40 hrs overpayment at current pay rate

[daniorr1976]

I work in Iowa but the company I worked for is based in McClean, VA. I have recently left the company and am going through the termination process. Back in 2002, the company made a management decision to 'double pay' all employees 1 week of work due to an employee buyout from one entity to another. Now that I am leaving, I owe the 40 hrs of pay back. The company is telling me that they are going to recoup this at my current pay rate and not at the pay rate it was paid to me. Their explanation of this is because "they pay out vacation at the current pay rate, this is the logic we are using to recoup the 'double pay' in 2002." I told them this is a weak analogy, but regardless they are sticking to this logic.

I have asked for a copy of the corporate policy that states that recoupment would be at the current pay rate and was told there was not one because the 'double' pay was not a benefit. It was a management decision. I have also asked for documentation of when employees were notified that this would be recouped at the current pay rate at time of termination and also documentation of when I acknowledged this. I have yet to receive anything.

I know I owe the dollar amount that was 'overpaid' to me back in 2002; I don't agree that I should pay more then was paid to me. Do I have a case?

Needless to say my current payrate is much higher now then it was in 2002.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you,

DaniWhat is the name of your state?

[ecmst12]

This wasn't really an overpayment, it wasn't an error. I don't see how you could owe ANY of it back.

[justalayman]

I'm not sure how or if you owe it or not. Not enough info for me to see one way or the other but...

the point is, they want back MORE than they paid you. It is not a matter of them keeping XX hours of pay at the current rate v. XX hours of pay at the old rate at which they gave it to you; it is a dollar figure they would be able to recoup, not XX hours of pay.

this differs from paying out vacation at the current pay rate because they are paying you for the vacation now, when you are in essence taking it.
They already paid you and are simply attempting to recoup what they paid you and has nothing to do with the number of hours of pay it represents.

[daniorr1976]

The company has now come back and said that I have been paid a week in advance since this occurrence. All of the documentation I have received from the company refers to the money as an "overpayment" for the week back in 2002. After some looking I was able to locate the initial email that informed employees of the situation. The initial email in 2002 stated: Company will recoup this overpayment over a period of time so not to cause financial hardship on the employee.: Also, my paycheck shows that I am being paid a week behind. I have two questions.

1. Doesn't the company have to inform employees exactly what they are doing? Meaning all emails and documentations from 2002 state "overpayment", if they were paying a week in advance would the have to inform the employee of this?

2. Wouldn't my pay stub show in the pay period dates a date in the future? For example, my final paycheck states pay period dates 3/8/08 thru 3/21/08 with the pay date being 3/28/08. My line of thinking is if I was being paid in advance my pay period would show 3/21/08 thru 4/4/08.

Thank you

[justalayman]

I would think you are correct about the dates. Obviously, the pay period indicated on the paycheck is what they are going to be held to.

I would ask them to explain what they meant when they said,"payment would be recouped etc."

have they reclaimed the money from any other employee?

From you latest post, it would appear you would owe the money but as I said before, they can only recoup the money you were overpaid which was one weeks pay of 2002 wages.

[CJane]

Originally Posted by daniorr1976

The initial email in 2002 stated: Company will recoup this overpayment over a period of time so not to cause financial hardship on the employee.:

The pertinent question, to me, is what their plan for recoupment was back in 2002, and how they can state that taking a lump sum at current pay rate for 40 hours is not a hardship.

[daniorr1976]

Thank you all for your replies. I have attempted to talk to the company about this but everytime I ask them to explain why their emails and documents state "overpayment" instend of advanced pay they tell me I can interpret however I would like.

I have decided to take them to small claims court. Maybe the judge can get an explanation out of them.

PS: I owe the money, I just don't believe I owe the money at my current pay rate, only at the payrate to was paid.

Again, thank you for your replies.