As I have written in the last perspectives, if an executive is dismissed without a “cause” and his lawyer has done the right job, his dismissal will trigger a payment for him of a certain amount of severance pay to cushion his transfer of employment. The time to focus on the particular “good reason” that the individual leader needs is when the executive`s employment contract is negotiated. This is when the employer of the company is eager to obtain the services of the executive and is most inclined to take into account the idea that there are specific “good reasons” suggested by the executive compensation lawyer, which are both reasonable and necessary to “seal the deal” to acquire the services of the executive client lawyer. The period of employment ends before the expiry of the effective term at the end of the first termination of the management employment by the company of cause, (ii) the termination of the employment of management by the company without cause, iii) the resignation of management rightly, (iv) the resignation of management, except for reason or (v) of the death or disability of the management. Lessons LearnedExecutives, Lawyers and Compensation Professionals can learn at least three important lessons from the Barney case. First, an officer must follow all the steps of the procedure which, quite rightly, are defined in the context of the current employment contract or severance pay. Almost all good reasons for terminations (and the Safe Harbor Rules of Code Section 409A) require the executive to: Second, the fear or expectation of a downgrade or dismissal is not enough. In one case dating back to 1998, it was found that an officer could not initiate a dismissal solely on the basis of receipt of a draft organization chart indicating a reduced reporting relationship. The expression of the CEO`s disappointment or the invitation to take certain actions that the employee considers “under a false pretext” may not be enough. In a 1998 case, Collins v.
Ralston Purina Co., found that the former employee had certainly anticipated his reassignment by a host company to a less attractive position in another region, but that, following the announcement of a change of control, he had voluntarily renounced the company`s employment before the purchaser was effectively reassigned and was therefore not entitled to payments under his withholding agreement. Similarly, when a company offered the worker a job in the same place where it moved and advised that it would have the right to amend the control pay if it refused the offer, the worker was not entitled to payment if he resigned and accepted another position before the date of the move (Televantos v. Lyondell Chemical Company, 3d Cir 2002). The executive may, quite rightly, terminate its employment under this agreement, in which case the executive is entitled to severance pay, as stated in the notice benefits section. For the purposes of this agreement, “good reason” means the occurrence of one of the following events, without the written consent of the executive: (i) a substantial decrease in the title, authority, status, duties or responsibilities of the executive; (ii) any reduction in the executive`s basic salary; (iii) a substantial breach of this agreement by the company; or (iv) the company requires management to locate its office in a location more than fifty miles outside its current office.