Question about demotion

J

Justjodes

Guest
Jurisdiction
Connecticut
I have held an executive position at my company for the past 5 years and they have recently hired someone to cover the entire US territory instead of individual territories. This hire will ultimately decide my new title and I believe my executive status will be no more (which includes several benefits and severance package that a non executive position does not include)
Are they allowed to take away these benefits and package?
 
If they were just based on your exec. status, yes. (unless you have a binding employment contract to the contrary)
 
I have held an executive position at my company for the past 5 years and they have recently hired someone to cover the entire US territory instead of individual territories. This hire will ultimately decide my new title and I believe my executive status will be no more (which includes several benefits and severance package that a non executive position does not include)
Are they allowed to take away these benefits and package?

If you have an employment contract, the contract will determine what legally can be done.

Absent an employment contract, your title and executive status might provide you certain perks, but you're still an AT-WILL employee.


That means you could be Senior Executive VP of EVERYTHING, and with the stroke of someone's magic Mont Blanc pen, you could find yourself demoted to APPRENTICE GOPHER, stripped of those executive "bennies" working for slave wages pennies!!!

Now, the other side of the Bowie knife cuts your way.
That means you can simply smile, tip your hat and say, "Gee, Ms. Bigdome, no thanks. I'll pass on that great opportunity, I resign."
 
I'm not quite sure why so many people believe that employers are allowed to increase pay and benefits, but that once something has been provided it can never be taken away.

However, I'm going to qualify the above answers a bit. Tell me more about exactly which benefits they are, and tell me more about the severance package. If I recall correctly CT is one of the very few states which (occasionally) mandates severance, and it really depends on which benefits you're talking about whether they can be unilaterally taken back.
 
I agree cbg. That's why I said if they are *just because of the exec. status* & not required by contract or law I don't see why they can't be taken away. OP should answer your questions for further information from us.
 
It's a little more complicated than that, but I do need the OP to answer before I can address it any further.
 
Then I'm mistaken about the severance. There are three states that do require it in limited circumstances; mine is one of them. I thought CT was another - I was evidently wrong.

However, I am not mistaken about the rest. There are certain benefits that cannot be unilaterally withdrawn. This is what I do for a living; I work with employer-sponsored benefits forty hours a week. I know what I'm talking about.
 
cbg, I do have this in an employment law book. Apparently they consider it severance Ct.
Conn. Gen. Stat. Ann. 31-51n, 31-51o
When law applies: Permanent shutdown or relocation of facility out of state.
Employers affected by requirements: Employers with 100 or more employees at any time during the previous 12-month period.
Severance requirements: Employer must pay for existing group health insurance coverage for terminated and dependents for 120 days or until employee is eligible for other group coverage, whichever comes first.
Exceptions: Facility closure due to bankruptcy.
Could that be what you were thinking of re Ct.? It seems in the states that have any type of severance requirements it generally applies to large employers & mass layoffs or shutdowns.
 
Back
Top