CT Appellate Court Refuses To Bind Employer To Progressive Discipline Policy

In a blow to employee rights, the Connecticut Appellate Court refused to require an employer to live up to its progressive discipline policy.  In the case of Brule v. Nerac, Inc., the Court found that the employer was not bound by the progressive discipline policy set forth in its management training course, because the language was too vague to give rise to a contractual obligation.

The employer provided a management training course, which included training materials directing managers to provide "progressive discipline, open communication and an opportunity for improvement" prior to terminating their subordinates’ employment.  The employees, who were terminated without following progressive discipline, claimed that this training course formed contractually binding obligations not to terminate them without first following progressive discipline.  The Court decided against the employees, holding that the training materials merely set forth "a series of suggested principles that the managers should observe. . . ." (emphasis in original).

This decision once again shows that, for most workers, progressive discipline policies are worthless, because the employer can toss them out the window at any time.  I can't tell you how many times I've had people call me to complain that they were fired without following a progressive discipline policy, and I've had to tell them that I couldn't help them.  When your employer has you sign off on the employee handbook with a big disclaimer that says you are an employee at-will, that means the employer is not bound by any of the policies in the handbook.