Shortening statute of limitations OK, but employers must prove agreement

In Michigan, it’s well-established that the statute of limitations for discrimination, harassment, and other employment-based claims may be shortened by an agreement between the employer and the employee. When employers seek to enforce an employment contract, including a contract to shorten the statute of limitations, however, they have the burden to prove the terms were agreed to by the employee.

Facts

A recent Michigan Supreme Court case demonstrates the importance of making sure new-hire paperwork, including agreements relating to employment, are actually executed.

The court reversed a court of appeals ruling upholding the dismissal of an employee’s discrimination claims as untimely. The trial court and the court of appeals relied on a 2004 employment application signed by the employee that shortened the statute of limitations to nine months.

The employee, however, wasn’t hired for the position she applied for in 2004. Instead, she was contacted by the employer in mid-2005 for potential employment and was later hired. The employer claimed it was entitled to rely on her previous application and agreements made as part of that application.

The employee argued that in 2005 she was required to restart the hiring process, never filled out a new application, and didn’t believe her previous application containing the shortened limitations period was binding.