Wright v Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co., UIA Digest No. 10.111 Section 29(1)(a) Cite as: Wright v Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co, unpublished opinion of the Oakland County Circuit Court, issued August 18, 2005 (Docket No. 05-064329-AE). Appeal pending: No Claimant: Sherry Wright Employer: Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co., Inc. Date of… Read More »
Ciaramitaro v Modern Hard Chrome Service Digest no. 4.26 Section 48 Cite as: Ciaramitaro v Modern Hard Chrome Service, unpublished opinion of the Macomb Circuit Court, issued November 1, 1996 (Docket No. 96-4644-AE). Appeal pending: No Claimant: Sam P. Ciaramitaro Employer: Modern Hard Chrome Service Docket no.: B91-12323RR-131804W Date of decision: November 1, 1996 View/download the full decision… Read More »
CIRCUIT COURT HOLDING: Payments made to claimant after his separation and after he stopped performing services were severance pay, in light of the fact both parties characterized them as such and claimant had no right to payment in lieu of notice.
BOARD OF REVIEW HOLDING: Where the claimant has no contractual entitlement to notice, any money paid by the employer upon termination is in the nature of a gift and therefore severance pay, which cannot be considered remuneration for purposes of Section 48.
CIRCUIT COURT HOLDING: Where an employer customarily asks its employees to leave on their dates of termination, and pays them “severance pay” determined by each person’s salary and seniority, the additional money is not payment in lieu of notice.
SUPREME COURT HOLDING: Where a labor agreement provides for the allocation of vacation pay to a portion of an indefinite layoff period, the payments are remuneration and not severance pay.