Employer denying education assistance.

[noname101]

NO WE DON'T AGREE! I never stated or even implied that it is or was a contract. You keep hearing what you want to hear and good luck finding any attorney that would even listen to you about this--it doesn't have to be updated, so long as the employer has the disclaimer in there. I'm done - beat head against wall !!!!!!!

Ummm You are reading it wrong. It states that the revision that happens were legally binding making it an at-will work place. That is the "contract" that is referring too. It concedes that the handbook sets the frame work for the employment. In this case changing it to an at-will work place. So the hand book is legally binding right?

Fine then stop making comments. You make statements with no supporting facts, you take every statement to be about you, really you should have that looked at (yes that one is to you), and you do not read all the comments on the board. First we need to discuss the fact that the hand book is a contract. The link I have seems to indicate that.
How does it not?

 

[ecmst12]

Of course, none of that matters since the case did not occur in YOUR STATE. So the decision is completely irrelevent to the laws of YOUR STATE.

Type the section of the handbook that deals with these classes. I am curious.

 

[Country Living]

If this class is so important to you, why don't you pay for it? The school has a financial aid office if you can't afford it.

The economy is tight. It sounds like your company is doing prudent financial management in order not to lay off employees or make cuts in other benefits such as health insurance.

You're arguing just to argue. You've been answered. If you're behaving the same way at work as you are on this board, you may very well find yourself on the short list when the company makes their next "prudent financial decision".

 

[noname101]

Of course, none of that matters since the case did not occur in YOUR STATE. So the decision is completely irrelevent to the laws of YOUR STATE.

Type the section of the handbook that deals with these classes. I am curious.

Because decision in other states are never used as precedence?

 

[noname101]

If this class is so important to you, why don't you pay for it? The school has a financial aid office if you can't afford it.

The economy is tight. It sounds like your company is doing prudent financial management in order not to lay off employees or make cuts in other benefits such as health insurance.

You're arguing just to argue. You've been answered. If you're behaving the same way at work as you are on this board, you may very well find yourself on the short list when the company makes their next "prudent financial decision".

How I act on this board?! What with ideas and thoughts that are my own, and not acting like a yes man, not accepting what someone says if they offer no supporting evidence. Hmmm it seems to have served me quite well so far. I work in places that encourage discourse, and new ideas, not a stagnate set of drones.

Although I do enjoy arguing that is not why I continue, I have not had a decent answer yet. I get half answers with now supporting reasons. I ask questions for clarification and I get rants about how I am not getting the answer I want to hear. Which is true because the answers I am getting are not full answers. Again I am after the truth no matter what it is, I just do not feel the answer I have received so far make any sense. I would never say the answers I have received so far are wrong. I would never say that, I do not have that knowledge. However, I have not received any answers that seem to answer my question fully. There seems to be a lot of evidence that the employee handbook is legally binding. Here is another case from the 7th circuit that says the employee handbook is legally binding: http://www.newyorkemploymentattorneyblog.com/Peters_v_Gilead_Sciences_Inc_06-4290.pdf
I am not in the 7th circuit but would think that a federal court calling the handbook legally binding has some weight.

 

[ecmst12]

No, cases in other states are not considered precedent in your state. Neither are federal cases from different circuits. And either way, it would still depend on the specific text in the handbook, whether it would be considered a contract even in states where this precedent WOULD apply. You still haven't posted the text I asked for.

And by the way, nothing stops you from filing a lawsuit against your company for denying the benefit. And nothing stops them from firing you for it, which they would almost certainly do. They could also fire you for arguing with them over the denial. So even if you find some valid legal argument (unlikely) that they are obligated to approve the class, you'd be out of a job before you'd have a chance to enroll. They definitely don't have to pay for the class if you are no longer an employee. You are NOT going to win this fight. Maybe the company's financial situation will improve and you can take the class NEXT year.

 

[eerelations]

This thread is really unbelievable.

OP, here's how it works on these forums:

1. you ask a question
2. we answer the question
3. if you don't like our answer, you contact an attorney and ask the attorney the question

So you've asked us over and over and over whether an employer can deny you access to something classified as a benefit in the employer's handbook, and we've answered over and over and over that this is perfectly legal for your employer to do. When are you going to twig that:

a) no matter how many millions of times you ask us this question, you are always going to get the same answer; and
b) it's time to ask an attorney this question.

 

[LeeHarveyBlotto]

Are we still feeding this troll?

 

[noname101]

No, cases in other states are not considered precedent in your state. Neither are federal cases from different circuits. And either way, it would still depend on the specific text in the handbook, whether it would be considered a contract even in states where this precedent WOULD apply. You still haven't posted the text I asked for.

And by the way, nothing stops you from filing a lawsuit against your company for denying the benefit. And nothing stops them from firing you for it, which they would almost certainly do. They could also fire you for arguing with them over the denial. So even if you find some valid legal argument (unlikely) that they are obligated to approve the class, you'd be out of a job before you'd have a chance to enroll. They definitely don't have to pay for the class if you are no longer an employee. You are NOT going to win this fight. Maybe the company's financial situation will improve and you can take the class NEXT year.

Finally a coherent well thought out answer with supporting statements. You even answered my previous question for clarification. Is this a point based board? Where do I make comments? There seems to be only limited support of a handbook being legally binding in the 6th circuit. You are correct I work in an at-will state and they could fire me for posting on this board, I do not deny that, for that matter they do not even need a reason. Of course that goes both ways and the current cost for replacing an employee is one year’s salary. But that is really off topic, and a decision that I need to make, although I appreciate your concern. I am sorry that did not post the handbook. Let us be honest you would really need to have the entire handbook to be able to make a decision, and I would not do that to my company. I would not sue my company over this, it is a bad economy after all. However, that does not mean it is not in my best interest to learn what legal rights I may or may not have. And what precedence there is for such a thing. Not doing these things would be irresponsible.

Someone posted a response to an earlier statement of mine that the employer has to continue paying their part of my medical insurance for my enrolment period or until I am terminated. The person responded that is not true, can you please explain why that would be?

Thank you.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The view of management depends on which side of the door you are on.

 

[noname101]

This thread is really unbelievable.

OP, here's how it works on these forums:

1. you ask a question
2. we answer the question
3. if you don't like our answer, you contact an attorney and ask the attorney the question

So you've asked us over and over and over whether an employer can deny you access to something classified as a benefit in the employer's handbook, and we've answered over and over and over that this is perfectly legal for your employer to do. When are you going to twig that:

a) no matter how many millions of times you ask us this question, you are always going to get the same answer; and
b) it's time to ask an attorney this question.

And that would be fine if part number two was done to a reasonable degree but, that was not done until a couple of posts ago. Simply making a statement does not make it true.
As for the “answers” you say I have gotten they have been quite limited, previous one mentioned excluded.

Hey the sky is pink. Well it most be I see it in writing.

However, statements without any supporting sentences, is not a complete answer. Which is why I asked for clarification. It seems that some of the people on this board are a bit unsure of themselves that they get so defensive when asked to clarify statements they made.

I stop asking questions when I get complete answers.

As for asking an attorney… I thought that is what I was doing…

 

[noname101]

This thread is really unbelievable.

OP, here's how it works on these forums:

1. you ask a question
2. we answer the question
3. if you don't like our answer, you contact an attorney and ask the attorney the question

So you've asked us over and over and over whether an employer can deny you access to something classified as a benefit in the employer's handbook, and we've answered over and over and over that this is perfectly legal for your employer to do. When are you going to twig that:

a) no matter how many millions of times you ask us this question, you are always going to get the same answer; and
b) it's time to ask an attorney this question.

<sarcasm off>
One more thing: “twig that” I am unfamiliar with this saying could you explain it a little?
<sarcasm on>

One more thing: "twig that".

 

[Zigner]

Umm but that is not the case. It is still on the approved list.

It's not approved. If it were, you wouldn't be here

Personally, if you were MY employee, I would have terminated you for your pure density and lack of willingness to understand when you're wrong.

(Crumbs for the troll)

 

[noname101]

Are we still feeding this troll?

Yeah discourse on a discussion board who would have thought.

Do not worry I am sure some day you will become a lawyer and win a case, keep at it.

 

[noname101]

It's not approved. If it were, you wouldn't be here

Personally, if you were MY employee, I would have terminated you for your pure density and lack of willingness to understand when you're wrong.

(Crumbs for the troll)

Do not worry I am sure I never would have worked for you.

(MMMM thanks for the crumbs I was hungry!)

 

[eerelations]

And that would be fine if part number two was done to a reasonable degree but, that was not done until a couple of posts ago. Simply making a statement does not make it true.
As for the “answers” you say I have gotten they have been quite limited, previous one mentioned excluded.

Hey the sky is pink. Well it most be I see it in writing.

However, statements without any supporting sentences, is not a complete answer. Which is why I asked for clarification. It seems that some of the people on this board are a bit unsure of themselves that they get so defensive when asked to clarify statements they made.

I stop asking questions when I get complete answers.

As for asking an attorney… I thought that is what I was doing…

Please re-read my post. #2 states that we answer your question. Period. It doesn't say anything about the quality of the answer, it just says that we provide an answer. If you don't like the answer (i.e., you think it's incomplete, or wrong, or untrue, or inaccurate, or too short, or too long, or incomprehensible, or whatever), proceed to #3 - talk to an attorney of your choice.

And please note, this site is called "Free Advice" - when did an attorney ever provide free advice? Another instance of you not reading carefully enough.