Legal Question in Civil Litigation in Maryland

I work for an individual that requires yearly employment contracts. He puts me on the payroll of a school he owns in New York although I do very little work (accounting / bookkeeping) for it. It is composed mainly of special education teachers. I noticed on my February 2009 (working there since 2005) contract a clause that I had to adhere to all the personnel manual policies. This was okay except for one item about having to take all your vacation by August 31st. I had just earned an extra week of vacation. I noted on the contract that I would like this changed since this is not normal or feasible, and that I am not a teacher whose term ends in August. I also noted in an email that the policy manual said the Executive Director (my boss) could make exceptions. I work in a Maryland satellite office with no other employees except him when he is here. I initialed the change and sent it back to his executive vice president who had originally sent me the document. There was supposed to be a raise included also. She obviously showed it to me. My boss subsequently told me he could not change anything and I told him that this was not feasible for me�I needed some vacation to accrue past August 31. Most companies do this. My anniversary was in February and this was ridiculous anyway. The policy was really for teachers and had not been updated. He would not agree. However she never returned my initialed document back to me to reject it and I have continued working as usual. He wanted me to stay. I know all his complicated accounts and investments so he obviously did not want me to go. I continued on the payroll as normal with benefits except no one from the company signed my contract which I had changed and initialed. My question is, since I have continued on the payroll as a regular employee (not a contract worker) and the contract I initial and signed was never returned to me, even though no one from there signed it, is this considered an acceptance of my contract since he has accepted my services and paid for them as a regular employee? The policy says that everyone needs a contract. Was the contract actually in force even though it was not signed by them just by my performing the work and being paid for it? It seems to me that by employing me, he accepted my conditions. Please advise.


Asked on 6/18/10, 1:29 pm

1 Answer from Attorneys
Robert Sher Wagshal and Sher

Under the facts it would be hard to make that argument because you were told by your boss that no changes could be made in the terms, yet you continued to work there under the schedule and the salary set forth in the agreement. Also since you've been working there for 5 years and you apparently noticed this term in the annual contract for the first time in '09, you can't really say that you started working there in detrimental reliance on the understanding that you could take vacation time later in the year. On the other hand, if you had regularly done this before without objection from management, that might give you a basis for that argument. (If the contract was changed in '09, not clear from your narrative, this wouldn't apply.

Read more
Answered on 6/21/10, 6:50 am


Related Questions & Answers

More General Civil Litigation questions and answers in Maryland