comparemela.com


On February 3, 2021, the Minnesota Supreme Court held in
Hall v. City of Plainview that a general disclaimer that a handbook should not be construed as a contract may not be effective to prevent a paid time off (PTO) policy contained in the handbook from forming a contract.  The court also upheld its previous interpretation of Minnesota Statutes § 181.13, which outlines the timing requirements for paying unpaid wages, holding that the 2013 amendments to the law did not create a new, independent substantive right to recover compensation.  In light of the decision, employers should review their handbooks or policy statements for language that could create a right to benefits, review their vacation, sick leave, and other PTO policies for clarity, and ensure that any handbook disclaimers are drafted specifically to prevent the formation of contractual rights.

Related Keywords

Minnesota ,United States ,City Of Plainview , ,Minnesota Supreme Court Decision ,Minnesota Supreme Court ,Minnesota Statutes ,Personnel Policies ,Procedures Manual ,Minnesota Supreme ,மினசோட்டா ,ஒன்றுபட்டது மாநிலங்களில் ,நகரம் ஆஃப் எளிய பார்வை ,மினசோட்டா உச்ச நீதிமன்றம் முடிவு ,மினசோட்டா உச்ச நீதிமன்றம் ,மினசோட்டா சட்டங்கள் ,பணியாளர்கள் பாலிஸீஸ் ,ப்ரொஸீஜர்ஸ் கையேடு ,மினசோட்டா உச்ச ,

© 2025 Vimarsana

comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.