A softwage glitch in Microsoft’s accounting program has resulted in the company both overpaying and underpaying severence to laid-off workers. Microsoft is asking those who recieved overpayments to give the money back. If people refuse is there anything Microsoft can do about it (other than not re-hiring them :rolleyes:)?
When later employers call to check references, they can be told “not eligible for rehire”.
There was a case where a guy got paid for training for a new job and then for some reason they told him to give the money back. (maybe he quit right after training) He refused to give the money back and he went to jail for theft after he was convicted. They agreed to drop the charges if he simply returned the money but I guess he thought he would win in court - bad move on his part. Not sure if MS could also say these people stole money.
Now, There’s a surprise…:rolleyes:
It’s a pretty simple Complaint to draft. Here is a form: http://www.state.hi.us/jud/cpfm7.PDF
Keeping property that doesn’t belong to you, even when you got it legally, can sometimes be larceny by conversion: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=mi&vol=appeals\122899\5894&invol=2
Of course what this almost always translates to is “Software did exactly what it was told to, but wasn’t adequately tested to ensure that this matched what was intended.”
I’m aware of the general principle of larceny by conversion. I’ve believe we’ve dealt with it before in threads about people who got too much money in their paycheck, or who received more than they expected from an ATM.
In the case you link, it’s clear that the wood cutter and the owner of the property had a contract of some sort, whether verbal or written, and the wood cutter reneged on it and kept the money for himself.
In the OP’s case, would it make any difference if Microsoft and the employees had not specifically stipulated beforehand how much each person would get as a payout?
For example, if an employee’s contract said something like “Upon termination, you will receive a payment of three months’ salary,” and the employee was accidentally paid four months’ salary, any attempt to keep the money would clearly contravene the terms of the contract.
But what if there was no stipulation about termination payments, and Microsoft simply sent more than they intended? Is the burden then on the company to show that its intentions differed from its actions? Would they have to provide evidence of the computer glitch? Or are they within their rights, in the absence of a contractually-specified amount, to simply say “We paid you too much, and now we want it back”?
Of course, it’s very likely that every employee’s termination payment amount were specifically covered in his or her contract or workplace agreement. But would things change if that had not been the case?
Since this is actually GQ, I’ll just say that there is no evidence that it was a software bug. From here:
It’s more likely that there were general terms for severance across the board - 1 week’s salary for every 6 months of service, or something like that. It’s pretty uncommon for there to be contracts at the individual level in the US.
One easy way for this to happen is in deciding which start date to use for employees who started as non-regular employees or who had multiple periods of employment. Payments issued before this is properly sorted out could be either underpayments or overpayments. Not sure this was Microsoft’s problem, but it’s a common problem in calculating benefits that depend on length of service.
As Harriet the Spry indicates, it’s unlikely that the company would do it the way you suggest, but there is plenty of play in the joints. I think it would be difficult indeed to convict an employee merely for cashing the check, for example. They could claim that they simply trusted their employer’s accounting or assumed that the surplus was an unannounced bonus. In many cases, I’d argue that even after the employer asked for the money back, the employee could legitimately claim that they thought they legally retained the money. The easiest way is a simple suit for money paid by mistake.
Yes. As I hinted above, the only basis for proving the appropriate mens rea in a case like this would be if the employee believed the employer’s claim when it requested the money back. I also wouldn’t rule out the possibility that the law of some jurisdictions actually permits the employee to keep the money in a case where there is no agreement about what the amount of severance pay will be (although I haven’t found any).
What would happen if they no longer have the money…because they are unemployed?
Ok…I’ll pay you back once I find a job… 
Usually, small claims court and collections.
I assume tax is withheld on the severance. How is that handled?
Regards,
Shodan
According to this, they are no longer seeking recompense:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29353191
It also appears that only 25 people were overpaid.