- 14 -
of the settlement agreement. The agreement's broad language
indicates that IBM considered the $207,000 payment as a quid pro
quo for petitioner's release of all potential claims against IBM,
including, but not limited to, tort claims. IBM did not make an
identifiable portion of the payment in settlement of petitioner's
personal injury claim. The payment was for severance pay as well
as for petitioner's release of potential tort and nontort claims
against IBM.
It is apparent to us that IBM viewed petitioner as litigious.
Petitioner formally disputed management's decision to end his
employment. He threatened to obtain an injunction to stop IBM's
downsizing program. He had previously filed an unfair labor
practice charge against IBM with the NRLB. And he had filed
several formal complaints against his supervisors. It was against
this background that IBM negotiated a termination settlement with
petitioner.
The final settlement amount--$207,000, represented an amount
equal to petitioner's 1-year salary ($107,000), plus $100,000.
Petitioner testified that he wanted a settlement equal to three
times his annual salary (or $321,000).
We conclude that IBM did not intend for any portion of the
$207,000 to be specifically carved out as a settlement of a tort or
tort type claim on account of a personal injury or sickness.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011