Employer is Not Consistent in Offers of Insurance Benefits to Different Employees
My question involves labor and employment law for the state of: Maryland
Hello hope someone can give me some advice as to my options here. I work for a small firm in MD that has less than 10 salaried employees including myself. When I joined I was under the impression that the benefits would be competitive or generous... I am a young professional and have learned from my mistake of not reviewing benefit details in depth and in writing before accepting an offer because besides 2 weeks of vacation my benefits are non existent. My employer does not contribute anything towards Health Insurance for example.
My understanding is that an employer must offer benefits uniformly to employee types. Essentially same contribution to benefits for all salaried employees and all hourly employees if any are offered to 1 of the category.... is this correct?
One of the other salaried employees at the company is a relative of the owner. Recently when she was passing out checks she left his check on my desk. When I picked it up I noticed that his check is broken down into 3 categories instead of 2 like everyone else. Ours are Base Salary and Commission. His check had these and another category for Health Insurance Payments/Benefits (do not remember the exact wording). I assume that contributions to benefits are usually done directly so perhaps since it is essentially just being paid to him as a bonus that is a loophole that protects her... or does 'earmarking' it in such a way shoot her in the foot?
I would appreciate anyone that can help me understand the situation better and explain to me what options myself and the other employees here have moving forward.
Re: Md - Insurance Benefits. Not Being Offered Consistently to All Employees
Your understanding is correct in the very broad sense but the devil is in the details. It doesn't necessarily have to be as broad as all salaried, or all hourly paid. I work for a university - we have, literally, 26 employee "classes", each designated by a letter of the alphabet. Each and every one of those classes has some variation either in how they are paid or in what benefits they are eligible for. Our plan document very specifically names who is eligible for what. If your employers have a plan document that states that "relatives of the owner" are eligible for health insurance but other salaried employees are not, they are in the clear. Please note that the plan document I am not talking about the employee handbook but the document that outlines any pre-tax benefits.
They are also free to have this benefit as a bonus for certain employees, or to provide it to only family members.
So there are no options here for you to address; no banner for you to take up and fly. There are a number of ways this could be legal; no reason to assume it is not being done legally; and quite frankly, what someone else is getting is none of your business.
I am now going to say that no matter where the check was left, you had no business looking at someone else's check. Yes, you could be fired for that.