 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Lim v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America9/14/2005
is over one million." Please explain your handling of these applications. [ ] 2. On 7/16/98 in a call to the New Business Team, you indicated that Mr. Philip Lim had not received his Prudential refund checks, however when Mr. Philip Lim contacted the company on 9/3/98, he stated that he just returned from the Philippines and that he had received the refund checks. Please explain what caused you to report the client for not receiving the original refund checks and rejection letters. [ ] 3. Please explain your reasons for failing to return the clients checks once received by you, and failing to turn the checks to your Manager immediately when you were instructed to do so on Sept. 8, and Sept. 9th. [ ] SJ, be sure to prepare a signed statement for the above by Oct. 22nd or it will be pursued without the benefit of your explanation."
When Lim received this letter from Hsiao she was busy working on the Rodriguez family "million dollar life insurance policies." She believed it was more important to complete her work on these cases than to respond to Hsiao's inquiry. Lim claims she already had provided a verbal explanation to Hsiao concerning all of her actions. Lim also claims she asked Hsiao's secretary for an extension to respond and Hsiao's secretary told her she could have more time. Lim did not provide a written response to the inquiry by October 22. In fact, she did not submit her response until November 30, 1988, more than three weeks after she was terminated.
This was not the first time Lim had failed to respond to such an inquiry letter. On or about July 29, 1998, Prudential sent Lim a "warning letter" signed by Hsiao concerning Lim's affiliation with other insurance companies in apparent violation of her Agent's Agreement as modified by the Collective Bargaining Agreement. Lim signed a copy of the letter acknowledging she received it. Of relevance to the present matter is the portion of the letter stating: " he Company is disturbed by your failure to comply with reasonable requests of Management, including your Manager's request for your written explanation. You should understand that the Company is entitled to a full written statement from an Agent concerning any aspect of the Agent's responsibility to the Company. Although you were instructed to write such a letter, you failed to comply with this request. Your actions in this case constitute insubordination. The Company will expect your full compliance with any similar request in the future."
On October 27, 1998, members of Prudential's Agency Relations Department met "to discuss and determine what, if any discipline was appropriate." The employees who attended the meeting were Katherine Pojawa, the Vice President of the Agency Relations Department, Mary Jean Russell, the Director of the Agency Relations Department, Jennifer Renfrow, the Manager of the Agency Relations Department, Marilyn Kustoff, agency relations specialist, and Ed Varcho, human resources consultant. "Based on the facts known to [them] at the time, including the fact had been warned just three months earlier regarding the need to promptly respond to Company requests," they "decided that based on 's non-compliance with Prudential policies and her flagrant disregard of Company directives, the appropriate disciplinary action was the termination of her employment." According to Katherine Pojawa, "Hsiao did not participate in this meeting or the decision to terminate 's employment."
Marilyn Kustoff instructed Hsiao to inform Lim about Prudential's decision to terminate her employment. Kustoff provided Hsiao with specific language to use in a termination letter. Hsiao prepared a letter which included the following language proposed by Kustoff: "
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 California Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|