 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Haire v. Philips Industries3/7/1996
JUDGMENT AFFIRMED.
Appellants, Kenneth J. Haire, et al., are appealing the trial court's grant of summary judgment in favor of appellees, Philips Industries Limited Partnership d.b.a. Philips Container and Container Investments, Inc. For the following reasons, we affirm.
Container Investments is the general partner of Philips Industries Limited Partnership, d.b.a. Philips Container. Philips Container owned and operated a plant in Cleveland, Ohio for the manufacture of plastic moldings. The Plus-Tool Company was awarded a judgment against Philips Container for copyright infringement. To satisfy the judgment, Philips planned to sell the Cleveland plant as a going concern to P.T. Resolution Company, the parent company of Plus-Tool. P.T. Resolution would then sell the plant to Letica Corporation.
The employees of Philips were informed of the contemplated sale, and that Letica would be interviewing them for possible employment. In October of 1993, Letica decided it could not buy the Cleveland plant as a going concern, due to possible environmental problems. On November 15, the employees of Philips were informed that the plant would close, and the assets sold to Letica. The employees were terminated on November 30, 1993.
Kenneth J. Haire and the other plaintiffs were employees of Philips when the plant closed. The plaintiffs sued appellees- defendants for breach of an oral contract for failure to pay certain vacation benefits.
When the employees were hired, they were told they would receive vacation benefits. The salaried employees received handbooks, which stated:
Vacations are earned on the anniversary date of each team member based on work during the prior twelve (12) month period.
The hourly employees also received handbooks, which stated:
Vacations are earned on the anniversary date of each team member based on work during the prior twelve (12) month period. A team member must be on payroll on the anniversary date to earn vacation.
Dorothy Haffey, personnel director for Philips, stated in her affidavit that an employee had to work twelve months, from one anniversary date of hire to the next, to be entitled to any vacation for the next year. If an employee left the company for whatever reason, before the anniversary date of their hire, they would not receive vacation pay which accrued from their last anniversary date to the date the employee left. Haffey stated this policy was applied consistently. Plaintiff Dennis Burke stated in deposition that his wife, Pamela Burke, did receive such accrued or pro-rata vacation pay when she quit her job at Philips in February, 1992.
When the plant closed, the employees received vacation pay for the vacation earned as of their anniversary date occurring before the plant closed on November 30, 1993. If the employee's anniversary date occurred after November 30, the employee was not paid vacation accrued from their last anniversary date up until the plant closing. This accrued vacation is the subject of this suit.
Haffey's affidavit stated that neither she nor the company president, George Humphrey, made any oral promises to the employees that they would be paid pro-rata vacation pay when the plant closed. George Humphrey deposed that the employees were told that earned vacation would be paid but accrued vacation would not be paid. In September, 1993, Humphrey posted a notice to the employees, which stated:
ALL VACATIONS EARNED UP TO THE DATE OF TRANSFER AND NOT USED ARE THE LIABILITY OF PHILIPS CONTAINER AND UNLESS ASSUMED BY LITICA (SIC) WILL BE PAID TO EACH EMPLOYEE IN THE FINAL PAY CHECK ISSUED BY PHILIPS
Page 1 2 3 Ohio Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|