paying an employer back for days the business was closed upon termination

[sharona]

Jurisdiction

New York

I was hired as an exempt employee -responsibility included hire and fire people supervised 20 people etc. Contract stated "at will". Contract states "will be paid the usual salary regardless of scheduled or emergency closures."
Then states "upon termination compensation for past services will be recalculated on a daily rate basis for actual days worked in the office." This line seems illegal in that it violates a FSLA deduction law. It violates retroactive employment status which I understood could only do prospectively.
I quit.
Private sector. They are sending me a bill for the days the business was closed. My understanding from DOL is that an exempt employee is owed their salary if the business closes (regardless or quantity or quality). They paid me at the time and now want it back.

 

[Zigner]

Thank you for sharing.

 

[cbg]

Just for the record, under the FLSA even an exempt employee only has to be paid for time they actually worked during the first and last weeks of employment.

 

[sharona]

Just for the record, under the FLSA even an exempt employee only has to be paid for time they actually worked during the first and last weeks of employment.

Yes thank you and that is what I understood the contract to read. However the employer is stating that I owe them money for days when they were closed months prior.

 

[army judge]

the employer is stating that I owe them money for days when they were closed months prior

As with most people, your issue might be addressed by arbitration, perhaps mediation.

Othwise, if an acceptable compromise can't be reached between the adversarial parties, your resolution will perhaps be revealed after civil litigation has fully transpired in a courtroom.

Good luck, as you seek and investigate the appropriate attorney to secure your redress.

 

[sharona]

The NYDOL has also changed its interpretation of New York Labor Law Section 193(2), which provides: "No employer shall make any charge against wages, or require an employee to make any payment by separate transaction unless such charge or payment is permitted as a deduction from wages under the provisions of ...

 

[army judge]

The NYDOL has also changed its interpretation of New York Labor Law Section 193(2), which provides: "No employer shall make any charge against wages, or require an employee to make any payment by separate transaction unless such charge or payment is permitted as a deduction from wages under the provisions of ...

It means from this point FORWARD, don't open a new thread to discuss your current issue.

Simply put, discuss YOUR TOP ISSUE in this thread only!

Please don't open another thread to pose any question relative to this topic.

Thank you in advance for complying with one of our very simple rules.

 

[sharona]

It means from this point FORWARD, don't open a new thread to discuss your current issue.

Simply put, discuss YOUR TOP ISSUE in this thread only!

Please don't open another thread to pose any question relative to this topic.

Thank you in advance for complying with one of our very simple rules.

I wasnt sure that it was, which is why I asked what this means. have a nice day

 

[cbg]

Sharona, if your employer is requiring you to repay them for days that you are entitled to be paid under the law, your first best recourse is the Department of Labor.