Hi, your previous expert opted out of your question; I will provide an answer. The particular regulations you are referencing have to do with post secondary schools' promises to prospective students and financial compensation of recruitment officers. Specifically schools must maintain certain standards in these matters to ensure they (through their students) will continue to receive federal student aid. In particular: the final regulations:
· Eliminate the existing 12 “safe harbor” provisions that allowed institutions to compensate college recruiters and admissions officers based on success in enrolling students.
· Allow for merit-based adjustments to employee compensation as long as such payments are not based, in any part, directly or indirectly upon success in securing enrollments or the award of financial aid.
· Define those covered by incentive compensation rules as “an entity or person engaged in any student recruitment or admission activity or in making decisions about the award of financial aid.”
· Disallow incentive payments “based in any part, directly or indirectly” upon success in securing enrollments or the award of financial aid.
In sum, institutions are required to take steps to further assure decoupling of financial compensation and the results of recruitment efforts. You can find those regulation at this link.
You appear to be alleging that since the college terminated you for not meeting its required recruitment numbers, the college may have wrongfully terminated you in light of these regulations (which establish public policy against recruitment quotas). I have done a fair amount of research and am not aware of any cases that state the premise that these regulations create a public policy. Second, the federal regulations do not go to a college's creation of recruitment quotas but only that a recruitment officer cannot be compensated in variance with the amount of persons they recruit. Thus, I'm doubtful that such a claim would success ed; not to say unequivocally that it would not succeed. There is a statute of limitations of one year for wrongful termination from the date of termination.
Being denied unemployment, based on what you've explained, does not make sense. Unless the employer can somehow prove that you intentionally were not meeting the quota or were engaged in horseplay on the job, your unemployment claim should be granted. You probably will want to appeal the denial of those benefits on that basis.
I believe this answers your question. However, if you need clarification or have follow-up questions regarding this matter, I will be happy to continue our conversation – select the Reply to Expert or Continue Conversation button. If you are otherwise satisfied with my response, please leave a positive rating as it is the only way I am able to get credit for my answers. Thank you, XXXXX XXXXX wish you all the best with this matter.