- Joined
- May 25, 2009
- Messages
- 613
- Reaction score
- 1
My point exactly. Employers throw all sorts of junk into contracts, and people incorrectly assume what is written is actually enforceable. In my previous career I had multiple instances where I challenged an employment contract (and won) because the clauses were not enforcable under state law. I'm actually two for two in fighting employment contracts. 😀
I wonder if "undue hardship" could be argued in this case. Undue Hardship gets argued all the time in employment law, though it typically is the employer challenging a ruling. I'm curious to see if the same concept can be applied here. I also wonder if they could argue that they state didn't take reasonable steps to ensure funding, and that notification about the possibility of a funding cut was not sufficiently disclosed prior to execution of the contract. Eh, just my 2 cents as an Armchair Lawyer.
Would be thrown out before you could say obje..... In all seriousness though, undue hardship is very hard to argue, particularly because there is no evidence of hardship. Not to mention, undue implies just that, whereas a state attorney would easily argue that due to economic strain the choice was inevitable and would point to other layoffs and the slippery slope a decision in the favor of the plaintiff would cause. This again is why this is such a hard argument.
I wonder if a lawyer would even take this case? ACLU has no purview on a case like this, maybe APA or APPIC would hire a lawyer, but no personal attorney would take this case because what is the best case of settlement? Interns lay no (or minimal) claim to income lost? And imagine trying to argue a mental strife argument? Geeeeyyaaaa!
And as to the latter argument, I think it IS sufficiently disclosed to ALL state employees, including interns whom are hired as state employees at the time of start of internship.
It really sucks what happened to the interns, but unfortunately it was entirely within the purview of the state (as outrageously unfair it is). The state was thinking that 22 interns at 20k (minimum) a year gives you 440k a year, not much but it ads up and its an easy cut based on seniority.