Yearly salary was known. from day one employee worked a lot of overtime, thus, bi-weekly pay was not consistent. Pay stub was not viewed until notified of error (several months after starting work) and at which time was told the correction will take place immediately. O/T stopped and paycheck was lower - employee did not verify if correction had taken place since pay was lower. Payroll supervisor verbally confirmed (3 times) during a meeting with the employee and the employee's supervisor. Everyone involved included HR noted that the correcting was taking place immediately. There was no reason to doubt the payroll supervisor or HR.
I am sorry that I don’t have better news for the employee, but please understand that I do have an ethical and professional obligation to provide customers with legally correct answers, even when an answer is not favorable to the customer.
If you need further help, just reply to me via the “REPLY” button and I will be happy to continue.
I cannot enter into an attorney client relationship, this is a public forum, and all posts are available for public viewing. There is no duty of confidentiality that attaches to any posts. The information provided is not a substitute for a local attorney’s legal advice.
Can the employee at least be able to negotiate the terms?...employee is tied up for a number of years to repay via payroll deduction and a lump sum if employment is left for any reason. Being able to seek better opportunities of employment - repayment is not the key issue, it is the terms surrounding the repayment. Employee does not have the means to repay a lump sum and would like to seek better employment opportunities. payment with interest was one of the options initially offered by the payroll supervisor but the written agreement did not include any other option but a lump sum if employment is left for any reason. can the employee be terminated for not signing the only terms currently being offered?
the employer is "the city" and they have the lawyers to pursue a lawsuit. in the event the employee leaves employment for whatever reason (on their own or via termination by the employer), the city presents and, based on what you noted above, wins the civil lawsuit against the employee. the employee does not have the lump sum amount to pay back, what can happen to the employee? (a genuine concern, the employee like many others lives paycheck to paycheck) what options, if any, does the employee have in bringing resolution to the matter. employee has never been involved in legal matters. does the legal system offer options (jail time, payment plan, take away your few belongings)? May sound ridiculous but these are real concerns and the reason why legal counsel is being sought.
In regards to garnished wages & retirement, could they garnish military retirement pay?
Can they garnish wages from the employee's spouse income (spouse is not employed by same employer)? Could this situation/outcome(whether court is involved or not) be reported to/reflected Credit Business Bureau (impacting the employee's credit scoring)? Could it be reported or noted somewhere where this may affect future employment? (areas now looked at by many employers prior to hiring.)
previously noted: "no the spouse is not liable for the debt"; also previously noted: "They can also try to seize any bank accounts or other investments other than retirement accounts." If the employee's bank account is a "joint account" (with spouse) can they seize the account (thus seizing spouse's income)?
previously noted: "Only if they sued and got a judgment against you could they report it." (referring to reporting to credit bureau). how long would this information remain in the report? once total reimbursement takes place - would the information be required to be removed from the report?
DISCLAIMER: Answers from Experts on JustAnswer are not substitutes for the advice of an attorney. JustAnswer is a public forum and questions and responses are not private or confidential or protected by the attorney-client privilege. The Expert above is not your attorney, and the response above is not legal advice. You should not read this response to propose specific action or address specific circumstances, but only to give you a sense of general principles of law that might affect the situation you describe. Application of these general principles to particular circumstances must be done by a lawyer who has spoken with you in confidence, learned all relevant information, and explored various options. Before acting on these general principles, you should hire a lawyer licensed to practice law in the jurisdiction to which your question pertains.
The responses above are from individual Experts, not JustAnswer. The site and services are provided “as is”. To view the verified credential of an Expert, click on the “Verified” symbol in the Expert’s profile. This site is not for emergency questions which should be directed immediately by telephone or in-person to qualified professionals. Please carefully read the Terms of Service (last updated February 8, 2012).