Pine River Chamber invites businesses to financial assistance presentation pineandlakes.com - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from pineandlakes.com Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
Thursday, February 18, 2021
Minnesota employers will be heading back to the drawing board to revise their handbook disclaimers. The Minnesota Supreme Court now requires specific language in policies that set out the terms and conditions for payment of certain employee benefits such as payouts of vacation and paid time off (PTO). In
Hall v. City of Plainview (No. A19-0606, February 3, 2021), the court held that a general provision in a handbook stating that the handbook is not a contract of employment does not prevent an employee from seeking to enforce the terms of an employer’s PTO payout policy.
Background
Donald Hall was the manager of the City of Plainview’s municipal liquor store. Under the city’s PTO policy, he had accumulated nearly 1,800 hours of unused PTO, and the balance of his PTO was reflected in his payroll statements. In 2017, the city terminated Hall’s employment and later refused to pay any of his unused PTO.
To embed, copy and paste the code into your website or blog:
Minnesota employers will be heading back to the drawing board to revise their handbook disclaimers. The Minnesota Supreme Court now requires specific language in policies that set out the terms and conditions for payment of certain employee benefits such as payouts of vacation and paid time off (PTO). In
Hall v. City of Plainview (No. A19-0606, February 3, 2021), the court held that a general provision in a handbook stating that the handbook is not a contract of employment does not prevent an employee from seeking to enforce the terms of an employer’s PTO payout policy.
On February 3, 2021, in
Hall v. City of Plainview, A19-0606, the Minnesota Supreme Court gave something to employees and employers alike when it addressed the issue of whether a handbook policy can create a unilateral contract (as to that provision), and what impact, if any, a general disclaimer has in negating the existence of a contract based on a specific policy. To reach its holding, the Court travelled back in time to revisit its seminal case,
Pine River State Bank vs. Mettille, and its progeny to outline the circumstances under which a handbook policy may rise to the level of a contract. In a nod to employees, and as a matter of first impression, the Court held that general disclaimer provisions in an employee handbook may not necessarily immunize employers from contractual liability based on specific policy language, particularly relating to compensation. In a nod to employers, the Court affirmed that Minn. Stat. §181.13(a) (for non-payment of wages) does not create an in
Chris Cunningham reappointed chair; Wanda Carlson is clerk; Katy Botz elected treasurer 3:00 am, Jan. 25, 2021 ×
Chris Cunningham
The Pine River-Backus School Board held its annual reorganizational meeting Monday, Jan. 4, followed by its regular monthly meeting.
Changes made were mostly small to reflect decisions discussed at other board meetings.
In December, the board chose to separate the clerk/treasurer position into two positions as recommended by Minnesota School Board Association guidelines. As a result, the board had to designate the salary for the divided positions ($200 a month for each now) and amend the list of approved board members who can make deposits to no longer include the clerk title.