Unemployment question. - Severance package

[chocovrdmicears]

A few years ago my BIL was laid off from a company that he worked at for 15 years. He got a nice severance package and collected unemployment.
One year later he got re-hired at the same company - they hired him back and gave him the 15 years back (in terms of vacation, pay base etc..) -
Last year he celebrated 20 years with the company.
He just got laid off again from the company.
Question:
Should his severance package be based on his 20 years or the past 4 years (since his re-hire date)?
TIA.

 

[bigmamimia]

The entire 20 years. The company set the precedent by giving him back those 15 years.

 

[mistysue]

Does he have some sort of contract? If it's not written out and there is no policy about something like this within the company they can do whatever they want. If it's not in writing they don't need to do a severance package at all. Honestly, from the perspective of somebody who is usually running things if they laid him off because they aren't doing well, I would think it would be based on the 4 years. He already got the package for the other 15 years. Often companies that give any severance it's like a nice paid vacation, it's a bit much to expect them to just keep giving him free stuff. That was generous to give him his vacation and pay back, they didn't have to do that.

 

[Allison]

Whatever the company decides unless there is something in writing.

 

[averysmom]

As far as I know-4 years. The disney store was sold by disney to the children's place and then sold back to disney. A friend of ours was the manager there throughout the whole time-she opened the store and worked there for 15 years. When they closed her store, she was only given severance for the last 2 years because that was the amount of time that disney had owned the disney store for a second time. At no point was her vacation, etc changed. So I think 4 years.

 

[RitaE]

Are you asking for a moral opinion or a legal opinion?

 

[Janet Hill]

Severance pay is not mandatory and besides he already been paid severance for those first 15 years why should they pay twice on it?

 

[seashoreCM]

Amount of salary and number of vacation days and omission of a probationary period can well be offered considering his experience as opposed to considering his former years with the company.

It would have been desirable if the company described the terms of employment fully in writing. If the company made it look like a recall as opposed to a new hire then the company leaves itself open to having to pay the full serverance over again.

Morally, his severance, to be comparable with that of other employees, would be one of:

Severance for a 20 year employee minus the dollar amount paid out with the previous severance, or,

Severance for a 4 year employee.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

Was he laid off or let go? Laid off usually means temporary and I can't imagine there bein any severance in that instance.

 

[manning]

Was he laid off or let go? Laid off usually means temporary and I can't imagine there bein any severance in that instance.

Today about everything is not temporary.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

Today about everything is not temporary.

Layoffs can BECOME permanent, but that isn't the intent. When we would lay people off at my old job, the assumption was that they would return when business picked up. In the meantime, they got to stay on company insurance at employee rates and they got to maintain their original hire date. You could be laid off every year for five years, but you'd still get the third week of vacation the same as anyone who was not laid off because you were still technically employed there. But there was never a severance. OTOH, my job eventually moved to another facility out of state and I declined to move. So I was let go and there WAS a severance package.

 

[GaSleepingBeautyFan]

In my experience, the severance would be based on the 4 years only.

This happened to me - I worked at a company for 8 years. I (and the rest of my team) were laid off when they lost the large client.

3 years later, they wanted me back, called me up and rehired me. I was able to negotiate my 8 years back from a vacation day/sick day standpoint.
(Others they hired back didn't do that and were annoyed with me that I'd thought of that so I had 4 weeks paid vacation and 10 sick days a year while they basically started over from square one.)

2 years later - they lost the client that I was working on and I was laid off again, I received severance based on the 2 years I'd worked for them with that client. I thought that was fair.

But that's just my experience - I'm sure other folks have had different ones based on the businesses they were in and if it was contract work or if there's a union.

 

[disneychrista]

Whatever the company decides unless there is something in writing.

This. They could give him no severance. I don't know of many company's that do this anymore. Same as company pensions.

 

[pandamom]

Was he laid off or let go? Laid off usually means temporary and I can't imagine there bein any severance in that instance.

I was laid off in December along with 100 or so other employees and we all received generous severance packages.

 

[LSchrow]

As far as I know-4 years. The disney store was sold by disney to the children's place and then sold back to disney. A friend of ours was the manager there throughout the whole time-she opened the store and worked there for 15 years. When they closed her store, she was only given severance for the last 2 years because that was the amount of time that disney had owned the disney store for a second time. At no point was her vacation, etc changed. So I think 4 years.

when disney bought back the stores, most people who stayed on through the sale and buy back had their years with disney bridged so vacation and benefits were based on their original hire date.
i don't recall how exactly how many service years were required before/after the buyback, tho.

as far as the OP's question:
legally, they don't have to give any severance unles it was in writing. and, as others said, he was already paid severence on his full term of employment (so ethically, they still are being fair - probably not what one wants to hear after years of dedication).
the company holds all the cards.

 

[tyzzle]

Was he laid off or let go? Laid off usually means temporary and I can't imagine there bein any severance in that instance.

Laid off does not mean temporary at all. It just means you weren't fired/terminated. In other words it means you lost your job through no fault if your own

 

[Arielle22]

Laid off does not mean temporary at all. It just means you weren't fired/terminated. In other words it means you lost your job through no fault if your own

Termination doesn't mean fired. Involuntary termination means fired while voluntary means you resigned.

Technically laid off was meant as temporary otherwise it was a termination. However in the past 10 years or so, laid off has been used instead of reduction in force, meaning the position was elmiinated.

I have handled many severance agreements. In addition to what we have done historically, I review the finances of the site (what can it afford) and the individual employee history. In the OP's case, I would go with 5 years as a guideline. If no original severance was given, the employee would receive 20 years. So why would I pay the employee a total of 35 years of severance when they worked only a total of 20 years?

 

[livsmom04]

I think it should be for the past 4 years. Even though they went back to his original time he was there before hand he was already paid for the 15 years.

 

[bpesch]

The answer is pretty much whatever the company decides.

 

[Handbag Lady]

It is my understanding that if it is a right to work state, you can just be laid off with nothing.

Just as you can quit without giving any notice.