Wage Garnishment questions....

Factual Questions
1

I received a document ordering me to send the state 15% of a particular employee’s pay, due to default on student loan payments.*

Now, I have no problem doing what the state is asking, but I have one question that I ask only on principle. Why am I expected to pay toward the administration of this order?

There will be some (albeit small) cost for the increased time for my accountant to calculate the amount due the state. She will also write an additional check. There is postage. So, each pay period I will be out a coupla bucks. Why am I expected to cover this? (again, it’s the principle of the thing)

.

*The employee has since resigned. She said her ex was supposed to pay the loan. I suggested she consult with her attorney, she said she can’t because she isn’t allowing him access to their daughter as was ordered. She said she would continue working if I paid her “under the table”. I told her no way. Oh well

2

It doesn’t allow for a fee? The only wage garnishments I’ve seen have included an allowance for a fee.

3

Apparently, it’s a state-by-state thing. I’ve only seen the kind that allow for a fee because Ohio allows for a fee and that’s where I was seeing the garnishment orders.

4

I’ll check with my accountant, but I saw nothing about me being reimbursed for my expenses in the matter.

5

When I was in college in the 70’s I remember complaints in the newspapers about some employers, especially of minimum wage employees. Apparent;y it was a common policy to fire any employee when they received a garnishee order. That simplified the paperwork and incentivized both the (ex)employee and the debtor to not bother the employer.

IIRC it became part of the labour code around then that such action was illegal.

6

Well, my employee “retired” voluntarily. But I cannot see the rationale for assuming an employer would act as a collection agent sans reimbursement .

7

Well… the government, Federal, state, local already expect you to spend insane amounts of time filling out BS forms and sending paperwork all over the damn place, most of it redundant, so really, whats another check and a stamp. Just a bit more BS.

90% of the time they leave once they’re garnished anyways.

Anecdote: A guy I worked with about 15 years ago, in my former life, on the other side of the country. He was divorced 15 years from his ex. At the time of their divorce, she was pregnant, she said it wasn’t his. When the kid was 15 the ex decided to have a paternity test, it was his. He was garnished, 15 years of back child support. The state decided he only needed $60 a week to live and took the rest. He kept the job, but took on part time jobs, and only kept them until the state caught up to him, and garnished 100% of the part time job, usually took 3 months.

That poor guy was a wreck, working 70-80 hours a week and trying to take care of his elderly parents. Flipping part time jobs like a pan cake, taking on anything he could get under the table. What a mess, and all HR had to do was write one more check, and buy another stamp.

8

I sympathize, but you aren’t really a “collection agent.” Person A owes Person B money that has not been paid. You owe Person A money. The court is simply ordering you to transfer the money you owe to Person A to Person B.

I agree with your basic point, but on my list of “Irritating Things the Government Makes Me Do for No Fucking Good Reason” I put that near the bottom.

9

Child support in this country are insane. I understand they are worried about the welfare of the child. But the father needs to live as well.

10

I think the employee who’s wager are being attached should be responsible for the costs incurred by you in following the attachment order. Just a guess on my part though.