5 ms·
I think OP pretty clearly states that both the two-week notice requirement and the unused vacation time payout were in the employee handbook, rather than in the
by mithr 8y ago
I think OP pretty clearly states that both the two-week notice requirement and the unused vacation time payout were in the employee handbook, rather than in the employment contract. Employees probably just had to sign a form indicating they've read and understood the handbook.
If both provisions were in the contract, then what you're stating would suggest that the company could not refuse to pay for the unused vacation time, either. But, again, that doesn't appear to be the case here.
- hannasanarion 8y agoRight right. Should've read more carefully. For completeness's sake, there are 38 states with an "implied contract exception" to at-will employment, where statements in the employee handbook would count as implied contract and be binding, but Florida is not one of them.
- gamblor956 8y agoThis is where arm-chair lawyering is dangerous. The statements in an employee handbook can be binding on the employer, but never the employee. This is well-settled case law in the US. (Whether it is actually binding depends on the specific language used, so I edited my comment from "is" to "can be".)