3 ms·
It's less outrageous than it sounds, just a face reading and one judge's interpretation of the law - the linked article does a poor job of providing context. >
by chomp 4y ago
It's less outrageous than it sounds, just a face reading and one judge's interpretation of the law - the linked article does a poor job of providing context.
>An employee is constructively discharged when his employer, rather than discharging him directly, inten-tionally creates a work atmosphere so intolerable that he is forced to quit involuntarily. Kirsch v. Fleet St., Ltd., 148 F.3d 149, 161 (2d Cir. 1998); Chertkovav. Connecticut Gen. Life Ins. Co., 92 F.3d 81, 89 (2d Cir. 1996). We have explained that working conditions are intolerable when, viewed as a whole, they are "so difficult or unpleasant that a reasonable person in the employee's shoes would have felt compelled to resign." Chertkova, 92 F.3d at 89 (quotations omitted).
Using the above framework, the judge determined that a reasonable person would not find a 150k/yr salary "to be sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of the victim's employment and create an abusive work environment." when 150k/yr is a really good salary. Reasonable person tests are always a judgment call. I disagree with this judgment call, but I don't think it's an unprofessional one.
- anonymouskimmer 4y agoAny "reasonable" "professional" judgement needs to take into account the financial situation of the individual, not the financial situation of others. If my salary was reduced by a little less than 1/3rd, I'd have a couple of hundred dollars left over each month after mandatory deductions, rent, and utilities. I'd effectively starve. And yet my salary would still be slightly above the national average salary. This sort of reasonableness standard is why the spouses and children of very rich people get millions of dollars a year in alimony and child support.
- chomp 4y agoI'll agree with that. And the appeals court agreed too, that you have to look at all of the facts (percentage, repeated suggestions that he could resign, reduction in responsibilities, loss of title). Though I don't think they can use the "I have a lot of bills" argument, as the finances of Mr. Scott aren't relevant in the constructive discharge law.
- anonymouskimmer 4y ago"Though I don't think they can use the "I have a lot of bills" argument, as the finances of Mr. Scott aren't relevant in the constructive discharge law." Probably not, unless they knew beforehand what Mr. Scott's tolerable financial situation was and purposefully reduced his compensation to below that level.