Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 8/20/2005 3:12:37 PM EDT
Link Posted: 8/20/2005 3:15:49 PM EDT
Dude I am starting to wonder if its you and not the jobs! I have never seen anyone so snake bit in my entire life. The writing is on the wall LT, get you self a fat woman and live off the government for the rest of your life!
Link Posted: 8/20/2005 3:20:47 PM EDT
JC, LT. How do you handle all this garbage? I probably would have blown my brains out of sheer frustration if I was in your shoes.
Link Posted: 8/20/2005 3:21:59 PM EDT
Link Posted: 8/20/2005 3:37:59 PM EDT
Are you entitled to a severance package if the company is sold? Maybe you can trade that off to release you from your relocation expense obligation.

Wouldn't you be better off and see what develops? You might end up with some type of lucrative stay bonus or a better job when the division is taken over.
Link Posted: 8/20/2005 3:42:59 PM EDT
lordtrader: Sorry to hear that, my "feeling," and I don't really know, but I've been thru a few meagers & acquisitions and stuff, but I don't think the people who you signed the contract with will really care. They are probably too busy trying to save their own butts. Since they more or less put you on notice, I think they would probably forget about it. Remember the old biddy, "some people get lost in the shuffle, but I just shuffle along with the lost."
Link Posted: 8/20/2005 3:56:22 PM EDT

Go and talk to management. Ask them flat out if it will happen. Feel them out and see if they are even leaning in that direction. If they're leaning in that direction, indicate that you'll take a layoff or something and skip severance/unemployment as long a they let you out of this relocation deal.

Link Posted: 8/20/2005 4:24:01 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Jon3:
Go and talk to management. Ask them flat out if it will happen. Feel them out and see if they are even leaning in that direction. If they're leaning in that direction, indicate that you'll take a layoff or something and skip severance/unemployment as long a they let you out of this relocation deal.



Good advice.
Link Posted: 8/20/2005 5:22:43 PM EDT
It's not likely that anyone outside of the officers or directors of the company would have any detailed information about the companies plans. When the company is ready to disclose the specifics they will have the HR weenies discuss anything related to the affected employees.

Link Posted: 8/20/2005 6:52:09 PM EDT
As I'm sure you've figured out, this is a tricky area. There are two two paths you may need to consider: 1) Get my local employment lawyer to see if there is anything unique to LA that would impact this deal if not have him kick, scream and piss on anyone who'll set still or/and 2) Talk to the head of human resources and discuss the situation just as you have done here.

Before I did anything else, I would re-read the terms of your offer again and see if anything regarding a sale or divesture is covered in the document.

Depending on how the current owners divest themselves will really impact you here. If they do a straight ownership transfer and spin you out to another company that wants to continue operations then nothing has really changed for you. Your arguement will be that there are been material changes that impact your existing agreement and that you don't have to wait to "ride this plane all the way down." If they do a asset sale and shutter the corporate entity that signed the agreement with you, the you probably won't have any issues and can just walk away.

My personal advise would be to talk to the most senior HR person you can get to before getting a lawyer. This will show that you are trying to work with them and not threaten. You also probably can't get yourself into a worse position by telling them your intention (just don't tell them who the new employer is). Also, I wouldn't go through this ordeal until I had the offer letter from the CA company.

Good luck.

R.
Link Posted: 8/20/2005 6:53:14 PM EDT
Link Posted: 8/20/2005 7:00:39 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/20/2005 7:02:05 PM EDT by lordtrader]
Link Posted: 8/20/2005 7:25:15 PM EDT

Originally Posted By lordtrader:
If they sell us, it will not be till the beginning of the year. Also if I get laid off, I will not need to pay back my relo package. I looked at what they offered the people in the Capital Markets group that are my level. It was not much. I have only been there less than 6mos. Which means 3mos severance. Hell it took me 2yrs to find another job in Dallas, where financial services is somewhat available. Here in New Orleans, it is non existant.

I can't afford to sit and wait for that to happen. The opportunity in CA will wait at the most one month. If I pass it up, and I sit here waiting. Once the lay off happens, and I am 90% sure it will, I am looking at being stuck in New Orleans without a job. Much like I was in Dallas.

I don't know. I think I will just have to take the job in CA and see if I could arrange a payment plan for my relo package.




Thats is they even ask for it.
Just move on, it will all work out. Sounds like you are going "home" soon anyway.
Link Posted: 8/21/2005 6:32:06 AM EDT

Originally Posted By lordtrader:

I read the offer letter. Says nothing about contigencies regarding merger and buy outs. I would assume that the merger agreement signed by the 2 companies encompasses contracts such as these. Giving the acquiring company full rights to anything in place.

Our division is too small to spin off. However, an asset sale would make more sense and more lucrative.

I have made friends with one of the HR ladies. She is in charge of recruiting officer levels. I think I will take your advice and chat with her. Maybe over happy hour so that we can talk "off the record"

I am still in the negotiation phase with the firm in CA. I was think of taking some sort of pay cut from they offer. IE: If they offer $50K a year. I would counter with $45K salary and a $5K signing bonus or forgivable loan. Still equates to $50K annually. Use the $5K to payoff relo package.



I'll also tell you about one of my law professors, his name was Al Witte. Al taught contracts. He often reminded us of "Al Witte's First Rule of Contracts - Make them come and get it."

From a practical standpoint, if your meeting with the HR lady doesn't go well - then piss on them. Go get your new job and take off. Don't worry about. Just walk away.

If they send you nasty letters just ignore them. NOTE: IF THEY DO SERVE YOU WITH A LAWSUIT DON'T IGNORE IT. A default judgment is just stupid. But I'd be willing to let them know that they're going to have to sue you to get any money back. I'd also let them know you'll get one a nasty ambulance chaser lawyer that will depose every executive in the company because you believe this action is based on their basis against you as a (pick one - man, woman, human, shooter, chicken eater, smoker, non-smoker). But this is really your last response. Just walk away quietly would be the next thing to try.

R.
Link Posted: 8/21/2005 6:43:48 AM EDT
If they are looking to sell out they are also looking to cut expenses. That means you. Ask them, they might release you. If you go willingly they have no expense associated with your departure. After all you are not an assest that will be carried on the books due to the relocatiion clause.
Link Posted: 8/21/2005 6:58:03 AM EDT

Originally Posted By freemanesq:

Originally Posted By lordtrader:

I read the offer letter. Says nothing about contigencies regarding merger and buy outs. I would assume that the merger agreement signed by the 2 companies encompasses contracts such as these. Giving the acquiring company full rights to anything in place.

Our division is too small to spin off. However, an asset sale would make more sense and more lucrative.

I have made friends with one of the HR ladies. She is in charge of recruiting officer levels. I think I will take your advice and chat with her. Maybe over happy hour so that we can talk "off the record"

I am still in the negotiation phase with the firm in CA. I was think of taking some sort of pay cut from they offer. IE: If they offer $50K a year. I would counter with $45K salary and a $5K signing bonus or forgivable loan. Still equates to $50K annually. Use the $5K to payoff relo package.



I'll also tell you about one of my law professors, his name was Al Witte. Al taught contracts. He often reminded us of "Al Witte's First Rule of Contracts - Make them come and get it."

From a practical standpoint, if your meeting with the HR lady doesn't go well - then piss on them. Go get your new job and take off. Don't worry about. Just walk away.

If they send you nasty letters just ignore them. NOTE: IF THEY DO SERVE YOU WITH A LAWSUIT DON'T IGNORE IT. A default judgment is just stupid. But I'd be willing to let them know that they're going to have to sue you to get any money back. I'd also let them know you'll get one a nasty ambulance chaser lawyer that will depose every executive in the company because you believe this action is based on their basis against you as a (pick one - man, woman, human, shooter, chicken eater, smoker, non-smoker). But this is really your last response. Just walk away quietly would be the next thing to try.

R.




You're my kind of lawyer.
Link Posted: 8/21/2005 7:46:41 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/21/2005 7:49:13 AM EDT by wildearp]

Originally Posted By Jon3:
Go and talk to management. Ask them flat out if it will happen. Feel them out and see if they are even leaning in that direction. If they're leaning in that direction, indicate that you'll take a layoff or something and skip severance/unemployment as long a they let you out of this relocation deal.




The company I worked for paid for relocation back and severance for layoffs, even short term. Just ask.

I also saw one person who wanted the layoff really bad. He wrote a letter to the CEO, a nice letter, telling him he didn't like the way the company was being run. That kinda sped up things for a job offer he received and kept the severance intact.
Link Posted: 8/21/2005 9:49:48 AM EDT

Originally Posted By freemanesq:
I'll also tell you about one of my law professors, his name was Al Witte. Al taught contracts. He often reminded us of "Al Witte's First Rule of Contracts - Make them come and get it."

From a practical standpoint, if your meeting with the HR lady doesn't go well - then piss on them. Go get your new job and take off. Don't worry about. Just walk away.

If they send you nasty letters just ignore them. NOTE: IF THEY DO SERVE YOU WITH A LAWSUIT DON'T IGNORE IT. A default judgment is just stupid. But I'd be willing to let them know that they're going to have to sue you to get any money back. I'd also let them know you'll get one a nasty ambulance chaser lawyer that will depose every executive in the company because you believe this action is based on their basis against you as a (pick one - man, woman, human, shooter, chicken eater, smoker, non-smoker). But this is really your last response. Just walk away quietly would be the next thing to try.

R.



We're only talking about $5000 dollars here so it's hard to say whether the company will pursue it or not. If they do it's hardly worth spending $50,000 or more to defend yourself against such a small obligation. It would be much better to settle the matter when he terminates his employment. I don't think LT will want that hanging over his head when he relocates to CA. Oh yeah, LT did agree to the terms of his employment contract at the the time. I don't see where the company has violated the terms of it at this time based on what he has posted here.
Link Posted: 8/21/2005 2:05:06 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/21/2005 2:08:12 PM EDT by freemanesq]

Originally Posted By rkbar15:

Originally Posted By freemanesq:
I'll also tell you about one of my law professors, his name was Al Witte. Al taught contracts. He often reminded us of "Al Witte's First Rule of Contracts - Make them come and get it."

From a practical standpoint, if your meeting with the HR lady doesn't go well - then piss on them. Go get your new job and take off. Don't worry about. Just walk away.

If they send you nasty letters just ignore them. NOTE: IF THEY DO SERVE YOU WITH A LAWSUIT DON'T IGNORE IT. A default judgment is just stupid. But I'd be willing to let them know that they're going to have to sue you to get any money back. I'd also let them know you'll get one a nasty ambulance chaser lawyer that will depose every executive in the company because you believe this action is based on their basis against you as a (pick one - man, woman, human, shooter, chicken eater, smoker, non-smoker). But this is really your last response. Just walk away quietly would be the next thing to try.

R.



We're only talking about $5000 dollars here so it's hard to say whether the company will pursue it or not. If they do it's hardly worth spending $50,000 or more to defend yourself against such a small obligation. It would be much better to settle the matter when he terminates his employment. I don't think LT will want that hanging over his head when he relocates to CA. Oh yeah, LT did agree to the terms of his employment contract at the the time. I don't see where the company has violated the terms of it at this time based on what he has posted here.



I didn't think those were the real numbers. I thought those were "fill in the blank" numbers so he wouldn't have to tell us how much he made.

If those are the real numbers, then I sure wouldn't worry about it. There's probably a provision in the offer letter that says they can take out that money out of the last check. I think you're looking at the issue the wrong way about "settling this matter." They are not going to sue the guy for less than $5000 (I say less than because I assume he's been there more than three months). There are no punitive damages for breach of contract so the worst thing that could happen is they would sue him and say he had to pay attorney's fees too (depending on the statute in LA).

So lets say he leaves and get's all his property out of LA, at least they've got to find him in CA and serve him. If they do, he can get his lawyer to make a settlement offer before the answer is due. There is nothing that I've implied or stated that would encourage him to pay an attorney more than his maximum potential liability.

As far as "I don't see where the company has violated the terms of it at this time based on what he has posted here." There are always implied terms to every contract (and I mean every contract). One could logically argue that this provision does not apply if there is credible information that the company might lay him off. There are common law rules (sorry I brought that up because we're talking about LA) that will let him out of the contract if it's effectly terminated. In other words, he doens't have to ride this thing all the way down. Clearly this provision in the employment agreement was placed there to keep him of flaking out and leaving the employer just because he thinks its the cool thing to do. In the alternative, he can argue that this is an implied employment agreement because it has a 6 month payback provision and he should counter sue.

There are a lot of issues here and I hope you were not implying that this is a moral issue about him meeting an obligation. This is not a black and white issue. This is not like he accepted an offer at this company and then got a better offer 10 minutes later. This is a grey area because of the context of this agreement and the implied terms.

R.

ETA - spelling
Link Posted: 8/21/2005 3:08:34 PM EDT
Link Posted: 8/21/2005 3:08:37 PM EDT
Not knowing the company involved it's difficult to say whether they will pursue the matter or not. It's not likely but there are companies that would pursue the matter. LT is also assuming he will be losing his job but that is just an assumption at this point.

If LT has already agreed to it or the company is allowed to under LA law they will likely apply any funds that are due against his final salary/commission check. It's also possible that the company would be willing to release him from the obligation based on the direction that the company is going. They may even offer him a lucrative stay bonus if they consider him a key employee.

Obviously he can argue "this is an implied employment agreement" as well as make other legal arguments to defend himself but it appears to me the he would really like to clear the matter up now and relocate back to CA.
Link Posted: 8/21/2005 3:25:34 PM EDT
Why are you in such a hurry to quit? The new buyer may work out.
Link Posted: 8/21/2005 5:01:09 PM EDT
Link Posted: 8/22/2005 4:12:32 PM EDT
Link Posted: 8/22/2005 4:25:52 PM EDT
lordtrader: Hey that HR lady is full of BS, come on be realistic, barring any unforseen circumstance, you folks are practically part of the new company. IF you're go to do it, I would make the jump in Dec, they won't have enough time to persue you, especially if they are going to lay you off anyways. I would take the time to look for a new job now, and tell you new employer that you start in Jan 2, 2006.
Link Posted: 8/22/2005 4:41:24 PM EDT

Originally Posted By freemanesq:

Originally Posted By lordtrader:

I read the offer letter. Says nothing about contigencies regarding merger and buy outs. I would assume that the merger agreement signed by the 2 companies encompasses contracts such as these. Giving the acquiring company full rights to anything in place.

Our division is too small to spin off. However, an asset sale would make more sense and more lucrative.

I have made friends with one of the HR ladies. She is in charge of recruiting officer levels. I think I will take your advice and chat with her. Maybe over happy hour so that we can talk "off the record"

I am still in the negotiation phase with the firm in CA. I was think of taking some sort of pay cut from they offer. IE: If they offer $50K a year. I would counter with $45K salary and a $5K signing bonus or forgivable loan. Still equates to $50K annually. Use the $5K to payoff relo package.



I'll also tell you about one of my law professors, his name was Al Witte. Al taught contracts. He often reminded us of "Al Witte's First Rule of Contracts - Make them come and get it."

From a practical standpoint, if your meeting with the HR lady doesn't go well - then piss on them. Go get your new job and take off. Don't worry about. Just walk away.

If they send you nasty letters just ignore them. NOTE: IF THEY DO SERVE YOU WITH A LAWSUIT DON'T IGNORE IT. A default judgment is just stupid. But I'd be willing to let them know that they're going to have to sue you to get any money back. I'd also let them know you'll get one a nasty ambulance chaser lawyer that will depose every executive in the company because you believe this action is based on their basis against you as a (pick one - man, woman, human, shooter, chicken eater, smoker, non-smoker). But this is really your last response. Just walk away quietly would be the next thing to try.

R.



LOL! I just hired a lawyer who basically said just that in regard to a general partnership in which I was a principal. What an ugly situation that was.
Link Posted: 8/22/2005 4:41:50 PM EDT
Take a page out of Clinton's book, and (a) deny you're bound; while (b) counterattacking.

If they KNEW that the merger talks were in the works while you were interviewing and being hired, you may have a cause of action for misrepresentation in the inducement, and under some state statutes or judicial decisions for a claim called "luring" -- i.e., they lured you to the new locale with representations that the job would promise one thing while being and turning out something different.

Get a good employment lawyer and get a demand letter written to the corporation employer. If you're lucky, you'll have a $12,000 to $15,000 settlement offer in a few weeks. Take that money and move wherever you want and start over.

Link Posted: 8/22/2005 4:48:47 PM EDT
If the job in CA is really good, I would bail now and let them come after you. I suppose you would lose them as a reference, but who cares? I doubt they will come after you for such a small amount. It sucks to have a lawsuit hanging over your head, but it goes with the territory. And, as a practical matter, there really is not that much money involved.

I hope some of you guys now understand why many of us stay in CA. Certain professions require that one be located near LWL morons.
Link Posted: 8/22/2005 5:01:23 PM EDT
Top Top