Small claim with a big impact: Side agreement can't violate a CBA

A recent decision by the Vermont Supreme Court should prompt unionized employers to examine any standard employment agreements employees are required to sign that may conflict with a collective bargaining agreement (CBA)—particularly when any attempts to claw back salaries for trainees who don't complete their commitments are concerned.

Facts

The town of Bennington filed a lawsuit against former police officer Clay Knight in small claims court. The town sought reimbursement of his salary and benefits under a contract. Specifically, he signed an "employment agreement" with the Bennington Police Department in which he agreed to repay the town a portion of his salary and benefits if he was unable or unwilling to remain employed for three years. In exchange, he received full-time training at the Vermont Training Academy. He left his position with seven months remaining on his three-year term. The town sued him in small claims court to recover the reimbursement for that time period.

As a defense to the town's claims, Knight argued the CBA between it and his union—the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees—contradicted his repayment obligation under the employment agreement. The CBA set the rate of pay for police officers, including officers who had not yet completed training, but was silent about any form of reimbursement related to training or early termination.