Resigning employee refuses to sign a “separation agreement,” demanding $5,000 per negative online post, and her firm threatens to withhold $2,200 in earned PTO if she doesn’t comply

• 
  Share

  via A. C.

  Young woman sitting at a table on a balcony, reading a document she's holding.

  ^{Image is representative only and does not depict the actual subjects of the story.}

• "New contract clause says I owe $5k for "negative public statements" after I quit"

  So i recently put in my two weeks at this marketing firm where i have been working for about two years now. The environment has been pretty toxic lately so i finally landed something better and gave my notice. Everything seemed fine until my manager called me into a meeting today and handed me a "separation and transition agreement" that they want me to sign before my last day next friday.

• I started reading through it and there is this crazy paragraph that basically says if i make any negative comments about the company , management or their clients on social media or review sites like glassdoor i have to pay them a flat fee of $5,000 per instance as "liquidated damages" for reputational harm. They also added that this applies even to anonymous posts if they can prove it was me.

• The weirdest part is that they are framing this as a clarification of my original nda but i checked my initial contract and there was nothing about fines or specific dollar amounts for talking about my experience. Now they are saying that if i dont sign this new paper they will withhold my remaining pto payout which is worth about $2,200. I am pretty sure they cant just invent new fines after i already resigned but the way the hr person was talking made it sound like this is standard procedure.

• I havent signed anything yet and told them i need to "review it with my spouse" just to get out of the room. Can they actually hold my earned pto hostage over a non-disparagement clause that wasnt in my original hire paperwork? And is a $5,000 fine for a bad review even enforceable in pennsylvania or is this just a scare tactic to keep me quiet about the high turnover rate there? I dont plan on going on a huge rant or anything but being legally threatened for a potential glassdoor review feels super sketchy and i dont want this hanging over my head for years.

• 
  Share

  via A. C.

  Young woman working on a laptop at a balcony table, looking out thoughtfully.

  ^{Image is representative only and does not depict the actual subjects of the story.}

• The separation agreement move is a classic intimidation play, and it works because most people do not know exactly where the legal line is and would rather sign something uncomfortable than find out the hard way. Presenting a document full of new financial penalties as a clarification of an existing NDA is a creative reframing of what is actually happening, which is inventing obligations after the fact and hoping the person across the table does not notice the difference. Nothing in the original contract mentioned flat fees or dollar amounts, and a clarification that introduces entirely new financial consequences is not a clarification, it is a new contract disguised as paperwork.

• And the PTO hostage situation is where it gets genuinely aggressive. Earned PTO is compensation that was already accrued, and in Pennsylvania withholding it as leverage to coerce someone into signing a document they were not previously obligated to sign is the kind of thing employment attorneys find very interesting. The HR person framing this as standard procedure is doing a lot of work, because standard procedure at a functional company does not typically involve threatening to withhold money someone already earned unless they agree to a retroactive gag order.

• V3lvetHatchling

  Don't sign a single thing.

• The anonymous posts clause is the detail that reveals how seriously they are taking their own reputation problem. Covering posts that could potentially be traced back to a former employee means they are already anticipating a volume of honest reviews significant enough to warrant legal infrastructure around it. That is not the behavior of a company confident in how it treats people, that is the behavior of a company that knows exactly what a candid Glassdoor page would look like and is spending legal fees to prevent it.

• edwbuck

  "review it with your spouse" and then "respond with your lawyer."

  raaneholmg

  "I decline to sign the separation and transition agreement. You have to pay out my PTO as per my contract."

  No need to spend money on lawyers yet, the PTO move was probably just a lie invented by the HR rep.

• 
  Share

  via A. C.

  Woman working on a laptop at a balcony table with documents and a potted plant.

  ^{Image is representative only and does not depict the actual subjects of the story.}

• Not signing before talking to an employment lawyer isn’t ever(!) paranoia, it’s just reading the room and the clauses correctly.

Tags