- 4 - During 1996, petitioner moved to Texas. That same year, Techmatics facilitated a change in the way petitioner was paid. To save overhead expenses, they requested that petitioner begin submitting time cards instead of invoices. Petitioner received an offer letter for “a part-time position as a Principal Engineer” from W.S. Szczypinski, executive vice president of Techmatics, dated October 11, 1996. The letter stated in part: “As a non-exempt employee you may work no longer than 40 hours per week without prior written authorization.” The letter further stated: “As a part-time employee you may be eligible for medical/life and dental benefits as outlined on the enclosed benefits summary. The 401(k) savings plan is also available to you. You will be paid through our payroll department on the 10th and 25th of each month.” Petitioner agreed to this new arrangement and signed what appeared to be a standard form employment agreement with Techmatics (the agreement).3 The purpose of the agreement was stated as follows: This Agreement sets forth certain acts during the employment relationship or following its termination that would be inconsistent with obligations of the Employee arising out of that relationship and with the position of trust and confidence in which the Employee is placed as a result of the relationship. The Company places a high degree of trust 3 The employment agreement does not reflect a signature of anyone from Techmatics.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011