Normally I write about bad news for employers to keep them current on what not to do. But this time, I’m starting off the new year by turning over a new leaf and writing about Cann v Elite Plastic Products Inc, an unpublished opinion of the Michigan Court of Appeals to remind employers what they must do! You’re welcome.
In this case, the plaintiff argued that the six-month limitations period on the job application was unenforceable because it was a contract of adhesion, unfair, against public policy and unconscionable. You see, this plaintiff was fired, allegedly wrongfully, on Jan. 20, 2017 but he didn’t file his lawsuit until Jan. 16, 2020. But for the six-month limitations period on the employment application, most employment claims could have been brought within three years, and his complaint would have squeaked in just under the wire.
The plaintiff argued that the appellate court should ignore the Michigan Supreme Court’s binding decision by that court’s majority in Rory v Continental Ins Co, 473 Mich 457 (2005) and follow the decision of the dissent. Not a strong argument to make considering, well, quite frankly, the published opinion was binding!
The plaintiff also asked the appellate court to ignore its own published opinion in Clark v DaimlerChrysler Corp, 268 Mich App 138 (2005). There was no doubt that the plaintiff was going to lose. When I read opinion, I was wondering if the end game was to take the issue to the Michigan Supreme Court and ask it to reconsider the issue. Time will tell if that is the strategy.
So, bottom line, employers can still include a six-month contractual limitations period on its employment application and they should! There have been may times over the years that my clients could have had a quick victory had they included such a limitations period. Even union members can be bound by a contractual limitations period to which they agree prior to being hired and joining the union.
The key is to make sure the contractual limitations period language is written correctly, so that it can be enforced by a court. Also key is that it must be on the employment application and not in the employee handbook which generally states “nothing in this handbook creates any contractual obligations” somewhere in its introduction.
If you don’t have a limitations period spelled out on your company’s employment application, consult with an experienced employment attorney today. By tomorrow you may find you're too late!
- Of Counsel
An of counsel attorney in the firm’s Detroit office, Claudia D. Orr exclusively represents and advises employers and management in employment and labor law matters.
Ms. Orr has an ever-growing practice in Alternative Dispute ...
Add a comment
- Employment Liability
- Labor Law
- Employment Discrimination
- Human Resources
- Minimum Wage
- Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)
- Paid Medical Leave Act (PMLA)
- Wage & Hour
- Department of Labor (DOL)
- Employment Agreement
- Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)
- Regulatory Law
- OSHA Issues
- Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA)
- Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA)
- National Labor Relations Act
- Title VII
- Hostile Work Environment
- Sick Leave
- Business Risk Management
- Noncompete Agreements
- Workplace Harassment
- Department of Justice
- National Labor Relations Board
- Medicare Issues
- Transgender Issues
- Workers' Compensation
- Unemployment Benefits
- Whistleblower Protection Act
- Sexual Harassment
- Civil Rights
- Class Actions
- Social Media
- Retail Liability
- Emergency Information
- Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA)
- Department of Education (DOE)
- Tax Law
- Title IX
- Medical Marijuana
- Right to Work
- Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)
- Union Organizing & Relations
- Court Delays Ruling on Fate of Michigan’s Paid Sick Leave, Minimum Wage Laws Until February 2023
- Michigan Supreme Court Affirms State’s Civil Right Law Prohibits Discrimination Based on Sexual Orientation
- DOJ Issues Guidance on ADA, Opioid Crisis Issues
- Congress Passes Law, With Retroactive Effect, to Invalidate Forced Arbitration Provisions at the Employee’s Election
- U.S. Supreme Court Temporarily Blocks Implementation of Vaccine Requirement for Large Businesses
- Contractual Limitations Periods STILL Alive and Well... on job Applications!
- Federal Appellate Court Takes Brakes Off COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate Carousel
- Employers: Hang on for Another Spin Around the Vaccine Mandate Carousel
- Stray Comments can Lead to Employer Liability
- President Biden's COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates Face Uncertain Future