 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Barmettler v. Reno Air Inc.4/16/1998
of his probation, created a specified duration of employment or, at least, restricted the company's ability to terminate. Id. at 1192.
The Holmes court concluded that the finder of fact could view the rehabilitation program as creating a mutual understanding that employment would continue for at least eighteen months absent a termination for cause or if the employee should quit his job. The court reasoned that, although the letter clearly stated that the employee could be discharged for violating it's terms, it was unclear whether a technical violation of probation would also constitute a violation of the terms of the letter and therefore grounds for discharge. Thus, under the circumstances set forth in Holmes, the jury concluded that the "at-will" relationship had been changed by the letter. Id. at 1193-94. The court, however, qualified its holding in a footnote:
We do not hold or intimate that every job or training or rehabilitation program could alter an employee 's at-will status. This case involves a unique nexus between an employee's participation in an employer -provided program and a grant of probation for a specific period in a criminal case at the mutual request of the employer and employee . Even in this unique circumstance, an employer desiring to maintain an at-will relationship could make an express disclaimer of intent to limit potential reasons for discharge or to create any expectation of continued employment for a certain duration. The record before us contains no such disclaimer.
Id. Holmes has no applicability to the case at bar. Barmettler's discharge had nothing to do with the breach of an express or implied covenant of continued employment created in derogation of the "at-will" arrangement that existed when he undertook and continued employment with Reno Air.
B. Disclaimers
The first page of Reno Air's Employee Handbook contains a disclaimer that the handbook merely serves as an informative tool and does not create either an implied or express contract between the airline and its employees. The disclaimer also, reminds Reno Air employees that they may be terminated at any time for any reason due to their at-will status.
We recently noted that employee handbooks which contain disclaimers that tend to contradict other promissory language in the handbooks are inherently ambiguous:
"Thus, . . . the entire handbook, including any disclaimer, should be considered in determining whether the handbook gives rise to a promise, an expectation and a benefit. "As with any question of fact, this is primarily a matter for the jury to decide. The court should intervene to resolve the handbook issue as a matter of law only if the handbook statements and the disclaimer, taken together, establish beyond any doubt tha enforceable promise either does or does not exist."
Southwest Gas v. Vargas, 111 Nev. 1064, 1072, 901 P.2d 693, 697-98 (1995) (quoting Fleming v. Borden, Inc., 450 S. E. 2d 589, 596 (S.C. 1994) (citations omitted)).
We conclude that, when read together, Reno Air's Employee Handbook and its Drug and Alcohol Policy do not create an inherent ambiguity with regard to Reno Air's express disclaimer that an employee's at-will status retains its vitality. Nor has Barmettler satisfied his burden of proof to the contrary. Accordingly, Barmettler's breach of contract claim was properly dismissed via summary judgment.
Whether the district court erred by reviewing portions of the arbitration proceedings.
In ruling on Barmettler's fraudulent misrepresentation claim, the district court noted that Barmettler failed to introduce evidence at the arbitration which demonst
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Nevada DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|