Air Wisconsin Bonus Repayment - legitimate?
12-26-2019, 10:31 AM
#21
In a land of unicorns
Joined APC: Apr 2014
Position: Whale FO
Posts: 6,469
Originally Posted by tallow
Yes it does. Involuntary or indentured servitude is where people may CHOOSE to take a service in exchange for their labors for a period of time. The best example of this was when people would become indentured servants to pay for the cost of their passage to the New World from Europe.
You might want to read some case law about this before embarrassing yourself more with your opinions.
Most training contracts. And almost all hiring bonus payback clauses, are totally enforceable.
12-26-2019, 10:36 AM
#22
Line Holder
Joined APC: Mar 2017
Posts: 59
Originally Posted by dera
You are so wrong it's not even funny.
You might want to read some case law about this before embarrassing yourself more with your opinions.
You might want to read some case law about this before embarrassing yourself more with your opinions.
Maybe this link will help 🤷🏼*♂️
http://https://www.dictionary.com/browse/involuntary
Edited to make link work.
12-26-2019, 12:03 PM
#23
Perennial Reserve
Joined APC: Jan 2018
Posts: 11,501
Originally Posted by tallow
State law or contract language cannot violate US Law. In that case they are unenforceable.
Thirteenth Amendment:
Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
When you sign the contract for your training an indenture is created for the period of time specified in the contract. This kind of contract was made illegal by the Thirteenth Amendment. That is why no airline has ever tried to take someone to court over this because they have good attorneys that know it is ultimately unenforceable.
So, moral issues aside, they can't force repayment through legal means. Now, they can report it as a bad debt, they can constantly harass you according to the Fair Credit Reporting Act, and future employers may look unfavorably on it if they pull your credit report or you tell them what you did. But, they can't force you to pay it back.
Thirteenth Amendment:
Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
When you sign the contract for your training an indenture is created for the period of time specified in the contract. This kind of contract was made illegal by the Thirteenth Amendment. That is why no airline has ever tried to take someone to court over this because they have good attorneys that know it is ultimately unenforceable.
So, moral issues aside, they can't force repayment through legal means. Now, they can report it as a bad debt, they can constantly harass you according to the Fair Credit Reporting Act, and future employers may look unfavorably on it if they pull your credit report or you tell them what you did. But, they can't force you to pay it back.
Nonsense. Just ask any NBA or NFL player about that. Ask any general contractor. It is ENTIRELY legal to commit yourself to work for a given period of time by voluntarily entering into a contract, even through just taking a signing bonus.
12-26-2019, 02:14 PM
#25
Perennial Reserve
Joined APC: Jan 2018
Posts: 11,501
OF COURSE A SIGNING BONUS CLAWBACK IS LEGAL.
It’s an enforceable contract. If it’s a small amount, they may let it go, but anyone who believes the 13th amendment is a bar to a clawback agreement on a signing bonus is simply ignorant.
The Seattle Seahawks sued former defensive linemen Malik McDowell, alleging that their former draft pick failed to pay back nearly $800,000 of a signing bonus.
According to the Detroit News, the suit was filed in U.S. District Court in the Eastern District of Michigan on Wednesday.
The Seahawks drafted McDowell in the second round of the 2017 NFL draft, but the former Michigan State product never played for the team.
McDowell was injured in an ATV accident in July 2017 and has yet to see action on the field after the Seahawks waived him with a non-football injury designation.
An arbitrator ruled in February 2019 that McDowell breached his contract after being injured away from the football and that he had to forfeit his signing bonus of nearly $1.6 million.
The Seahawks withheld payment of $800,000 for the 2018 season,
According to the Detroit News, the suit was filed in U.S. District Court in the Eastern District of Michigan on Wednesday.
The Seahawks drafted McDowell in the second round of the 2017 NFL draft, but the former Michigan State product never played for the team.
McDowell was injured in an ATV accident in July 2017 and has yet to see action on the field after the Seahawks waived him with a non-football injury designation.
An arbitrator ruled in February 2019 that McDowell breached his contract after being injured away from the football and that he had to forfeit his signing bonus of nearly $1.6 million.
The Seahawks withheld payment of $800,000 for the 2018 season,
Dick’s Sues Former CTO Over Signing Bonus
Posted by SGB Media | Oct 24, 2019 | SGB Updates, Update
Dick’s Sporting Goods has filed a lawsuit against Paul Gaffney, its former chief technology officer who joined Kohl’s in September. The lawsuit charges Gaffney owes the company half of the $1.5 million sign-on bonus he received due to his resigning less than two years after being hired.
Gaffney was hired in November 2017. The suit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, Gaffney’s contract called for Gaffney to refund 100 percent of his $1.5 million sign-on bonus if he left Dick’s within a year after being hired and 50 percent of the bonus if he left within two years
Posted by SGB Media | Oct 24, 2019 | SGB Updates, Update
Dick’s Sporting Goods has filed a lawsuit against Paul Gaffney, its former chief technology officer who joined Kohl’s in September. The lawsuit charges Gaffney owes the company half of the $1.5 million sign-on bonus he received due to his resigning less than two years after being hired.
Gaffney was hired in November 2017. The suit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, Gaffney’s contract called for Gaffney to refund 100 percent of his $1.5 million sign-on bonus if he left Dick’s within a year after being hired and 50 percent of the bonus if he left within two years
The San Francisco 49ers have sued Aldon Smith in order to get back the more than $300,000 in forfeited signing bonuses that the team says is owed to them.
According to the complaint (via the Hollywood Reporter) filed Monday in a Northern California district court, Smith was required to pay $1,186,027 of his $8.961,092 signing bonus when the linebacker was suspended for nine games after violating the NFL substance abuse and personal conduct policy in 2014. The 49ers claim Smith, who is now with the Raiders, has only paid them $844,396.82. They are suing to get the outstanding $341,630.18 owed to them.
According to the complaint (via the Hollywood Reporter) filed Monday in a Northern California district court, Smith was required to pay $1,186,027 of his $8.961,092 signing bonus when the linebacker was suspended for nine games after violating the NFL substance abuse and personal conduct policy in 2014. The 49ers claim Smith, who is now with the Raiders, has only paid them $844,396.82. They are suing to get the outstanding $341,630.18 owed to them.
12-26-2019, 04:02 PM
#26
In a land of unicorns
Joined APC: Apr 2014
Position: Whale FO
Posts: 6,469
Originally Posted by Varsity
So they are giving you money you haven't earned? Sounds like a loan.
Why did they count a loan as income? When I get a mortgage, that's not income.
Why did they count a loan as income? When I get a mortgage, that's not income.
I'll sue my bank tomorrow.
12-27-2019, 02:33 AM
#27
Line Holder
Joined APC: Oct 2019
Posts: 45
Originally Posted by dera
You are so wrong it's not even funny.
You might want to read some case law about this before embarrassing yourself more with your opinions.
Most training contracts. And almost all hiring bonus payback clauses, are totally enforceable.
You might want to read some case law about this before embarrassing yourself more with your opinions.
Most training contracts. And almost all hiring bonus payback clauses, are totally enforceable.
12-27-2019, 02:35 AM
#28
Line Holder
Joined APC: Oct 2019
Posts: 45
Originally Posted by dera
You are so wrong it's not even funny.
You might want to read some case law about this before embarrassing yourself more with your opinions.
Most training contracts. And almost all hiring bonus payback clauses, are totally enforceable.
You might want to read some case law about this before embarrassing yourself more with your opinions.
Most training contracts. And almost all hiring bonus payback clauses, are totally enforceable.
Name one instance where a training contract has ever been enforced by a court.
12-27-2019, 02:36 AM
#29
Line Holder
Joined APC: Oct 2019
Posts: 45
Originally Posted by dera
Same logic applies to my mortgage. It is indentured servitude. I HAVE to work to pay it back.
I'll sue my bank tomorrow.
I'll sue my bank tomorrow.
12-27-2019, 02:49 AM
#30
Line Holder
Joined APC: Oct 2019
Posts: 45
Originally Posted by Excargodog
OF COURSE A SIGNING BONUS CLAWBACK IS LEGAL.
It’s an enforceable contract. If it’s a small amount, they may let it go, but anyone who believes the 13th amendment is a bar to a clawback agreement on a signing bonus is simply ignorant.
It’s an enforceable contract. If it’s a small amount, they may let it go, but anyone who believes the 13th amendment is a bar to a clawback agreement on a signing bonus is simply ignorant.
Once again. They can sue you, they can consider it a bad debt and harass you with certain restrictions, hoping you don't know your rights or hire an attorney. Or you can pay it back because you are a good guy. Using attorneys to file questionable lawsuits to threaten and get what you want is business 101. Just ask the Trumpster. However, if it ever sees a courtroom (and it won't) they will lose.
Last edited by tallow; 12-27-2019 at 03:21 AM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
