Amazingly bad employment experience

[milestogo]

Last edited Tue Aug 2, 2016, 03:56 PM - Edit history (1)

I've been out of work for a couple of months and last week I accepted a position which started today.

My first appointment was with the HR person. She brought in a lot of paperwork for me to sign, most of which was really irrelevant to my position. Then came the employment contract. This was supposed to be a regular W-2 employee job.

I started reading it and the 4th paragraph stated that if an employee left the job for any reason in less than 2 years they would owe the company money. There was a specific formula that had to do with minimum wage and the length of time before 2 years - I don't remember the details. I was appalled.

I told the HR person that this was ridiculous and probably wouldn't hold up in court and that I would not sign the contract because of this clause. I didn't read any further than the 4th paragraph. She said OK, don't worry about it.

Then I was supposed to be trained by the operations manager. He told me that the job involves supporting 5 other businesses owned by the company president. There was no mention of this at the interview. He said that the company president has lots of unethical business practices and that he will ask me to do things that are unethical.

Then the VP came in and said I had to sign the contract or leave. I left.

I am still feeling kind of stunned. Has anyone ever heard of something like this?

Edit: I just found this article on the company president: http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/michael-eisenga-s-business-no-stranger-to-state-investigations/article_b25d054f-aeb2-54ab-8c52-b1b569cf68b3.html

[VMA131Marine]

1. Name and shame!

What was the company?

[Glamrock]

2. Was it

Trump tower?

[orwell]

9. LOL

[MineralMan]

3. Never heard of such a thing.

What company was this?

[milestogo]

4. It was a mortgage company

with offices in 10 states. Don't want to say more or I might get sued!

[msanthrope]

6. Sued for what? Name 'em. nt

[underahedgerow]

12. They can't sue you for telling the truth. In the very least, I'd report it to the state's attorney's

office, and I'm totally serious.

If they're willing to screw you, imagine what they're doing to their clients. Absolutely get the ball rolling on this. Think of all the lives they're messing with, and about the fact that you could save countless people from getting ripped off, clients and employees alike.

It's the right thing to do.

[milestogo]

19. Thanks

I wish I had a copy of the contract - but I didn't sign it, so no copy. I will consider writing a letter to the states attorney though.

[underahedgerow]

47. I'd go further up the chain to the Office of the Inspector General and report your

concerns about mortgage fraud. If it's offices in several states, then it crosses state lines, etc.

If they're willing to screw you, and ask you to do unethical things, then they ARE doing unethical things.

Inspector General Hotline
The Office of Inspector General (OIG) was established by Congress as an independent oversight authority within the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The OIG operates a Hotline to facilitate the reporting of fraud, waste, or abuse in either agency's programs or activities.

[e-mail]

Phone numbers: 800-827-3340
202-452-6400

[former9thward]

52. Sued for what?

Well maybe this for starters: "He said that the company president has lots of unethical business practices and that he will ask me to do things that are unethical." The OP has no personal knowledge of any of these practices but is reporting it to the public as a fact. Is it likely someone on site like DU would be sued? No, not likely but possible especially if the owner was named and then started to get spammed by a bunch of people.

[Rex]

55. lulz

[cwydro]

22. Sued for what?

Very weird story.

[snooper2]

25. sounds like a cool story, the "operations manager" told you the president was unethical

within your first couple hours being there...RIGHT LOL

[milestogo]

27. And that wasn't even all he told me.

The President is a cheapskate, puts everything on his personal credit card so he can get frequent flyer miles.

He owns several other businesses unrelated to this one, but will ask the IT person (which would have been me) to support his other businesses.

Yeah, it was great that he told me - and it tells you how bad things are.

[snooper2]

29. Guess you got lucky then...google the guys name and see how many cases have been filed against him

[obamanut2012]

45. yup

[SheilaT]

51. You didn't sign anything.

And never went to work for them.

You do need to contact the appropriate agencies about this company.

Remaining silent about such things only allows these things to continue.

[Rex]

54. You cannot get sued, you did not sign a non-disclosure agreement.

You are free to say whatever you want to, you never worked for them.

[MANative]

5. Never have on any level, and I'm a VP of HR

Something sounds really off here, and I'm about 100% certain it wouldn't stand up in court. Similar to a non-compete clause, which rarely holds up unless the individual is paid a huge severance. Companies who play this type of game are not worth working for.

[milestogo]

10. Is there anyone to report it to?

The HR person was very nice as we were chatting as I was signing all these documents. I can easily imagine someone not bothering to read the whole contract before they sign it.

From what the Operations manager said, the President just changed the employment contract in the last couple of months. I am not sure it reflects on the company as a whole or if its just this office.

[MANative]

14. You can try your state labor board, or contact a pro bono employment attorney.

Many states have legal aid organizations that will look into contracts like this for little or no money. I'd guess that the company President knows next to nothing about FLSA and employment contracts. Do you live in an at-will state?

[milestogo]

18. Thanks. Yes, its an at-will state.

I don't want the job at this point. I am sure the HR person knew that the contract would not hold up but she was not going to challenge it.

[MANative]

20. For an at-will state, that makes this even more strange. If they tie you to a term of employment,

which is implied by a pay-back clause, there would usually be a quid pro quo compensation of some sort. Seems like it was entirely one-way, and that violates the spirit of at-will, if not the literal law.

[milestogo]

30. I get the feeling he has had a lot of people leave

because they were frustrated with the company - and maybe he thinks this will prevent that. But it could have the opposite effect - of making people run.

During the interview the President asked me if I could make a 2 year commitment to the job and I said yes. But of course I had no idea what was in the employment contract.

Yes, entirely one-way.

[sarcasmo]

7. Sounds like you did the right thing, very fishy.

[unblock]

8. wow! at least it was very helpful that your trainer was so candid!

i've had a number of sucky job experiences, but one that takes the cake in my book was when the ceo of a company i worked for in austin took me for a car ride just outside of austin city limits and then asked me not to hire any gay people.

this was back when austin was one of the very few places where that was illegal. of course, the business was located in austin, so actually doing the asking in round rock was not a defense in any way but the ceo was not too bright in that way.

aside from being heinous legally and ethically, it was stupid business. his company was in dire straights and if a gay employee could save him why the hell wouldn't he want that? why tie your own hands?

i wanted to quit that day but thought i better discuss it with my now-wife first. happily, she was proud of me, though we figured it was best logistically for me to clear out my desk over the weekend. then i came in monday morning just to tell him i quit.

[milestogo]

11. Years ago I heard a VP say to the hiring manager

"Be sure and interview a few minorities". The implication was clearly to interview and not hire minorities. So at least part of the reason I got the job was for not being a minority.

[whatthehey]

13. Typical really

If the company incurs significant costs. I have had that in my contract if they paid relocation for example but may be used for training or equipment too. Less common if just a show up and work job.

[milestogo]

15. No costs to them for hiring or training or equipping me.

They do have people on staff that train for mortgage licenses and might not pass the exam.

I am in IT and cost them nothing extra. To me it just seems like bullying. If you want people to stay, treat them well.

Contracts are not one-size fits all.

Non competes are kind of silly when you make the guy who works in the mailroom sign it, but companies do.

[Wellstone ruled]

23. Must be Utah,

common thing in certain Counties. Every time someone with half a brain challenge this,the Company loses big time. The other beauty is locked in arbitration,which is used in Washington,Iron and Kane Counties,used both in employment and Hospital admissions. Lawyers love these things. Ka-ching.

[MANative]

16. Relocation repay is quite a bit different, and that's often on a pro-rated scale.

I've never seen it used for equipment, except in cases of deliberate destruction or misuse, and only very rarely used for training expenses. I'd have to see the actual contract language, but this sounds totally screwy.

[petronius]

17. There was a story a few months back about a woman (in Texas?) who lost

a case over something like this. Basically, the company calls it 'retention pay' or something like that, predicated on a promise to stay for x amount of time. As I recall, the woman left the job, declined to pay back the 'retention pay', and is now on the hook for a big chunk. IIRC, however, she initially had the option of taking just a lower base pay with no time limit, or the higher pay rate with the agreement to stay for some number of years. I'll see if I can find the threads on it (and see if I'm remembering correctly)...

On edit: here's the article I was thinking about.

[MANative]

21. Retention pay is something very different.

That's used typically when you want to keep an existing key executive or functional employee during some kind of business transition, and in exchange for the retention bonus, you agree to stay for a defined period of time or until the completion of a specific project. If you leave before that completion, you have to pay back the retention money. Very standard and very legal, and always over and above one's base salary. It's very clearly laid out in retention documents, and I've done dozens of those. That's not what the OP describes here.

[petronius]

24. It should be something very different, but did you read the news article I linked?

Coupled with the OP's comment about minimum wage, these sound to me like similar situations...

[MANative]

26. No, I didn't read the article - at work and only had a few moments!

"Retention" payments have a very specific connotation in HR, but it may have been used differently. Will bookmark to check it out later.

[Pacifist Patriot]

28. No harm in calling the Department of Labor and asking their opinion.

I'm curious if the contract violates FLSA.

As for openly stating you'd be asked to do unethical things, I'm flabbergasted. Whoa!

[milestogo]

32. Unethical things... My first thought was sexual harassment.

So I asked the trainer, but he said that's the one thing he DOESN'T do.

[Pacifist Patriot]

33. Well sexual harassment isn't just unethical it's also illegal.

I run an HR department so your story has me insanely curious. It does not remotely pass the sniff test as far as I can tell. Doesn't sound like the organization has their house in order. An FLSA complaint could rock them. Did you by any chance keep a copy of the contract?

[milestogo]

36. Since I didn't sign the employment contract, I don't have a copy.

But they did not give me copies of anything I signed - which is another red flag.

[Pacifist Patriot]

40. Huge one!

[Warpy]

31. This is nuts. They likely already had "dead peasant" insurance in case you inconveniently

kicked the bucket and they had to find, hire, and train someone new. Paying them for the pleasure of working there is insane and quite likely illegal. Do write a letter to the state AG office and inquire about this practice. You are not responsible for any costs they incur as a result of needing to employ people, especially since it's also a tax writeoff that you can bet your ass they're taking.

I'd say you're well out of this one, they sound like a pretty sleazy outfit. You were also warned by the operations manager that it was only the beginning of sleaze at this place.

My guess is that if you'd read farther down, you'd also have found a clause that forbid you to work for a competitor for a period of time after you quit or were fired, usually three to five years. That's unenforceable, also, and even restaurants have been caught trying to pull that one.

[milestogo]

34. There was a non-compete and I signed it.

But I never got past paragraph 4 of the employment contract. God only knows what came after that.

Non-competes make sense in some contexts. The problem is that some companies make the guy working in the mailroom sign the same document as the executives who actually do have proprietary information.

[Warpy]

37. It's all part of the wage slavery they think they can get away with

the way they once did in their glory days of serfdom. Any time you have high unemployment, they try to pull this shit.

You are well out of this one.

[Pacifist Patriot]

39. I don't know what state you're in, but that contract would be unenforceable in Florida.

Employment "contracts" are virtually meaningless in "at will" states.

Non-competes are enforceable if they are limited to a very high degree. Especially in terms of geographic distance and term of expiration. But most companies screw these up and write them to their advantage not realizing labore law favors employee rights.

[milestogo]

44. I'm in WI.

And we have Scott Walker for a Governor.

[Pacifist Patriot]

46. Found this

"In Wisconsin, most employment is employment at-will, meaning that an employee may generally be discharged at any
time for any reason. Many employees think that if they have worked at a certain job for many years and have had no
negative performance reviews, they cannot be fired. This is not true. In most cases, an employer has the right to terminate an employee for almost any reason or, in fact, for no reason at all. Similarly, the employee may choose to terminate his or her employment at any time and for any reason."

I don't know what that means in terms of being able to require the employee pay an employer back if they leave before a certain period of time, but it indicates to me that employers in Wisconsin should be very cautious about employment contracts.

In my experience, most legitimate employers have new hires sign an:

ADA-compliant job description
Offer letter that describes the compensation package
Acknowledgement that the new hire has received the Employee Handbook that describes the companies policies and agrees to abide by them.

Aside from that, it's generally just the required forms such as a W4 and I-9.

[milestogo]

49. Yeah, that sounds about right...

I just found this article on the company president: http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/michael-eisenga-s-business-no-stranger-to-state-investigations/article_b25d054f-aeb2-54ab-8c52-b1b569cf68b3.html

[Pacifist Patriot]

35. DOL is a better option than the AG in one respect.

Department of Labor and FLSA? As an HR person, I'd much rather respond to questions from the state AG than the DOL any day. LOL!

Now on being asked to do unethical things...might well be worth a call to the AG.

[Warpy]

38. Yes, I'd suggest a copy sent to them, also

and let them know that a tax writeoff is being taken when the company is extorting the money from an employee who finds a job a poor fit.

[Marengo]

41. If this is a mortgage lender, and openly admitted to unethical practices, I recommend...

Reporting them ASAP. I'd probably start with the FTC and/or the CFPB.

[milestogo]

42. The operations manager is not employed by the company -

he is an outside consultant, which is probably why he could tell me what he thinks. What he said was "Mike is going to ask you to do things that aren't ethical, and you're going to have to say no to him. He'll push you a little, but if you're firm he'll give up." He didn't give any examples.

I'm in IT so it may be that the unethical practices are more general business practices rather than something to do with mortgages.

[woodsprite]

43. Sorry about your job situation, but really feel you did the right thing. n/t

[milestogo]

48. Oh my. Should have read this before I got there.

This is the guy:

http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/michael-eisenga-s-business-no-stranger-to-state-investigations/article_b25d054f-aeb2-54ab-8c52-b1b569cf68b3.html

[milestogo]

56. OMG Here he is next to Scott Walker!

http://host.madison.com/ct/news/local/writers/jack_craver/the-fascinating-story-of-michael-eisenga-joel-kleefisch-s-vip/article_c0d58f36-7d64-11e3-8278-001a4bcf887a.html



Tried to contribute his way to paying less child support!!

[Enrique]

53. thanks for posting

I heartily second the suggestions to report this, and I would suggest contacting the media as well, maybe the reporter that wrote the other story on him.

I would LOVE to hear from people that didn't read the contract as carefully as you did and what became of them.

[Yo_Mama]

58. Since it is a mortgage company, contact CFPB.

http://www.consumerfinance.gov/?gclid=CJS1hovwo84CFdg9gQodSWQOBw

I don't think you can be sued for passing along the type of information and presentation that you were given, as long as it is the truth. But better to do it to a federal agency rather than online.

This does seem fishy.

The Ops Mgr probably figured that if you survived the initial shock (desperate enough for a job), then it would be safe to have you there. Otherwise, better to have you out of their doors.

Just tell them that this is very odd, and that you are worried precisely because it is a mortgage company.

[Amaril]

59. This must be becoming a "thing"

The daughter of a friend was offered a position with a company that manufactures educational supplies, and there was a clause in the contract stating that if the employee left before their one year anniversary they would have to pay back all monies received (salary, bonuses & even travel reimbursement). She, like you, declined.

[A HERETIC I AM]

60. You're better off without them. n/t