- 15 -
relationship with New Dimensions as a good business
relationship, and he did not mention any changes in his status.
On this record, we find it difficult to believe that
petitioner was completely unaware of the changes in the terms of
his status. Not only were the petitioner’s paychecks issued
without pay stubs showing the withholding of taxes, but the
paychecks reflect the loss of sick leave benefits during the
disputed pay period. In particular, his paycheck dated November
26, 1999, for $600 contained the following notation: “payment -
did not come in full week”. Since there is no evidence that
petitioner exceeded his allocated sick leave or paid vacation
period, we believe that petitioner did lose certain employee
benefits during the disputed pay period. Petitioner must have
been fully aware of this change; workers generally do not ignore
changes in benefits. Instead of receiving payroll checks with
businesslike withholding stubs from a payroll service,
petitioner started receiving handwritten checks. Some of them
were dishonored by New Dimensions’s bank, and then petitioner
received makeup checks in amounts sufficient to cover the
penalties. One check was marked: “pay + $78 Late Fee”. Another
check was for $200 payable to “Cash” and marked on its face:
“Steve, towards pay - 10/22". Others covered compensation for
petitioner as well as utility bills and bank payments. There is
no possibility that petitioner was unaware of problems at New
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011