C.F.R.
»
Title 20
» CHAPTER IX—OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR VETERANS' EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR › PART 1002—REGULATIONS UNDER THE UNIFORMED SERVICES EMPLOYMENT AND REEMPLOYMENT RIGHTS ACT OF 1994 › Subpart E—Reemployment Rights and Benefits
A seniority-based right or benefit is one that accrues with, or is determined by, longevity in employment. Generally, whether a right or benefit is seniority-based depends on three factors:
(a) Whether the right or benefit is a reward for length of service rather than a form of short-term compensation for work performed;
(b) Whether it is reasonably certain that the employee would have received the right or benefit if he or she had remained continuously employed during the period of service; and,
(c) Whether it is the employer's actual custom or practice to provide or withhold the right or benefit as a reward for length of service. Provisions of an employment contract or policies in the employee handbook are not controlling if the employer's actual custom or practice is different from what is written in the contract or handbook.
Notes of Decisions
Dale Huhmann v. Fed. Express Corp., 874 F.3d 1102 (9th Cir. 2017).
“20 C.F.R. 1002.212. 9 . The district court’s finding that Section 4316 did not bar Huhmann’s claim does not contradict the Fifth Circuit's decision in Rogers v.”
Hoefert v. Am. Airlines Inc. (N.D. Tex. 2020).
· cites it 2× “Applicable regulations provide three factors for courts to analyze when determining whether a benefit is seniority-based. First, it must be determined whether the benefit is a reward for length of service rather than a form of short-term compensation for work performed.”
Panarello v. State, Pc (Sup. Ct. R.I. 2009).
· cites it 2× “2d at 701 ; 20 C.F.R. 1002.212 (2008). As explained in the Federal Regulations: As a general rule, the employee is entitled to reemployment in the job position that he or she would have attained with reasonable certainty if not for the absence due to uniformed service.”
Michael Moss v. UAL (7th Cir. 2021).
“2014) (applying the Alabama Power test); see also 20 C.F.R. § 1002.212 (listing the factors set forth in the Alabama Power 17 test, along with one factor not relevant here, as interpretive guidance to determine if a benefit is seniority-based).”
Clarkson v. Alaska Airlines Inc (E.D. Wash. 2021).
“” 13 20 C.F.R. § 1002.212 . 14 The regulations set forth three factors to consider when assessing whether a 15 right or benefit is seniority-based: (1) whether the right or benefit is a reward for 16 length of service rather than a form of short-term compensation for work 17…”
Synoracki v. Alaska Airlines Inc (W.D. Wash. 2022).
“20 C.F.R. § 1002.212 (c). 23 Plaintiff has not raised a triable issue of fact regarding the essential function or real nature 24 of the sick time benefit.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.