you know i don't recall this would have been prior to initiating that occasion would have been a letter to counsel with that time jason torres and other injuries were safer shot they went through a few different changes but i believe that's a request for final wages was attorney's fees and interest that would have accrued on those wages now had this been a contract between two businesses no it wouldn't apply whatsoever but what these two parties contracted for were wages and salaries at the point of reading the statute states that for before that but she wasn't actually terminated till the following kill wire something and what she was actually seeking were the wages during the period when she had that turkey is that what else about that maybe correction on her however her it was the defendant or that they were on her she had not performed any duty or had not performed any work for those wages through time period and we had a motion to dismiss i believe that was on summary judgment one is  zero to see if any particular meaning i mean if you take it just from the dictionary it does have a specific meaning doesn't it i think that when you contract for wages and a part of wrongful reaches th and if you look at all the articles that come down on the statute the larger point defense firms are running scared from it because they recognize what it does it well going back to my earlier question it's fires other states did you did you  intended for payment within twenty one days for future earnings pursuant to the contract as you posit here then doesn't get do away with the obligation to mitigate the damages step two hundred seventy three thousand dollars i mean i know this along with the question but doesn't the fact that the ultimate amount was less than that then you were asked for doesn't that mitigate against the argument that when there's a that you should be given all the wages that you had accumulated to think that's what it visions because it puts it into a date certain now you are taking away this idea of mitigation of damages but at the same time if you look at honestly say that what he yet may or earn up that they have to pay is the same as what would be due is on a future wages under a contract and you can you say that that's what the engine and earn politics now that we believe is different from the fact they didn't put earn wages or salaries they specifically carved out areas where in the is that twenty one days seems like a short amount of time in which to determine the final owed on a contract if the long fully breached but we think that this is a tool to not only keep employees from long fully reaching a contract but contract for someone who was terminated long flight would become to immediately where someone who continues to work for the next five years only has to collect them on whatever pay schedule they have set up but that is the basis for contracts like your responsible for the contracts that you enter illinois wage payment collection act is illinois version of a wage steps that it imposes civil and criminal penalties as well as shifting attorney's fees in the two percent interest when an employer fails to pay wages earned or owed on a timely basis everything in the statute to do with making sure that an employer time we pay is for the work it receives the act has nothing to do with broken promises for future services or perspective future  deductions for iris purposes things like a car coupon of benefit in title might have there been any of those things may not have been taxable would have been received a different treatment the treatment of the damages essentially is as if you know for tax purposes it's treated as wages but it still damages for breach of contract theory not if you know wages for purposes of the of the old of which let me ask you this under his theory let's say he's terminated mean that if he starts to work somewhere again that should not be working then for the next three or four years so that he isn't mitigating is damages you see what i'm getting at let's let's see what do we do in that case  of contract law and the obligation to mitigate and cover damages to gain other employment all those things would be left to the window for the employer to pursue after the fact i suppose to monitor the employee's future employment activity to go back and seek some kind of recovery and ask the op to expect from the illinois wage him collection act simply based on the definitional section of the act the same would be true as well to terminate through malice or wrongfulness wherever else it's simply not applicable to the illinois wage in clutch act it's pleasurable to a breach of contract claim perhaps there could be some kind of wrongful termination or so she labor for services rendered yeah let me let me talk about that the that change it indeed hands to hire argument on the change that definitional definitional section of the act there's no legislative history or discussion around that change that could find there's if there's been no case as you point out in illinois the twenty nine year since that change that stands for the proposition that it would become an a severance pay and the reference in that definition that wages are stablish through contractor agreement that's meant to sweep in things like severance plan bonus plans and books out these things that may not rise to the level of a contract but may simply be of something that awaited employee learns of his or her total remuneration package when they commence work and as you point out the operative sections of the statute which is what controls here only associates the word earned or overload with the word wages let me say that again in this way the striking of that language was really duplicative because everywhere the word wages or compensation appears in the operative sections of the act it's preceded or immediately followed by the word earned or section three of the act  that employees must be paid wages earned section four are describes the number of days within which wages earn must be paid following the end of the pay three wages earned again section five with  agreement to tendril a severance range and or commission plan or bonus might be all kinds of things vacation pay in illinois illinois unusual among states in that it recognizes even accrued vacation pay that one isn't able to use but they've accrued the rights to it that's a form of wages in illinois under this statute but it all has to do with the time you worked for the employer in the calculation of those wages because the key under section five is under  final compensation when an employee leaves for whatever reason they must pay as you pointed out final compensation owed is the key owed in full at the time of separation the penalty  fourteen that's the provision that provides for civil criminal penalties attorneys fees interest it discusses those penalties and such only applying for those employees and i quote not timely paid final compensation or wages these substantive operative parts of the statute that's what controls the outcome of this case not the definitions actually those up those operatives parts of the statute also evidence of what the court has pointed out the overall inten  cases perhaps three that the site simply got it wrong they were at the motion to dismiss phase i point out that the judge in our case below also did not dismiss on our motion to dismiss to get rid of the illinois wage payment act early he wages and there's good reason for that as the court of pointed out earlier the plaintiffs desired reading of the statute would put employers in an impossible situation and it would create of search results his reading would make a violation of the act automatic anytime there's a breach of an employment contract and let's think about that that it would include a breach of an implied employment contract if an employee is able to establish the right hand broker an offer letter an implied duration of the point then automatically that employer would be liable not just for the breach of contract damages payable and taxable as wages but for the plaintiff's attorneys fees the liability would be impossible to escape because the amounts owed would be impossible to calculate as just as palmer pointed out it would be impossible to know this employer would have would have required the employer to pay out the remainder of the contract term nearly four years about three years and ten months at the if in twenty one days of the plaintiff's terminations when in fact this plaintiff only received two years of compensation under that same contract require and against the employer to chase him down for those  years and the council mentioned our example in our brief with two employees of the five year contract but that is accepted fact problem here if you had two employees with a five year look at the court here in this case ever fine if any of its  contract then employer decides terminate one after one year say for whatever reason so now within twenty one days employer must pay out the four years of compensation to this one employee while the other employee and the five year employer felt that this employee had threw down his keys for time stomped out of the building wasn't living up to what it felt was its benefit of the bargain and several employment was terminated in that situation this employer should have paid out four years in twenty one days and only when we actually have gone through trial yes there was a finding that the employer breached the contract but there was also a finding that the employee failed to mitigate and was only a contract situations or broken promises even maliciously broken promises for future services under the american system in illinois law each side fears its fees the parties here could have contracted in there are that should end this matter and the judgment of the court below should be affirm employment contract on it but you're saying i'm a teacher wages are the same as wages that it already they were all the time they signed that contract as long as my client continue to perform which the court found that he did he was owed those wages now the terminations and then did your client get to go if that person goes and gets employment elsewhere is there then any mitigation of damages you poor may be able to unpaid or equal wages under the statute and that the statute was created to resolve breach of contract there that's really the issue and your honor saying and with when you read all the provisions to gather what were they thinking when they said you have to pay this money within two weeks then they were thinking that a breach of contract you paid the money paid the money first and talk later forget about the courts were not resolving these these breach elections anymore in the courts we're going to order you to pay the money upfront plus two percent plus attorney's fees and costs and it's really kind of what you're throwing out here to present it that's what the legislature intended now i don't know where we for damages because someone breached but africa and whether those damages are really the same as on his wages for the rather good they didn't want to include damages for breach of an employment contract i think they could have left that contract damages for breach of contract requires calculation and calculation to ultimately come up with the pm actual work yet we had that calculation isn't just wages it's wages you know if you if you if you've litigated one for terminations case we can see that they have you know that it's not just wages it's damages and they're not the same thing because if it was just wages you would have been awarded all he was performing if they felt that they want to get rid of him cheaply they could possibly pop out his contract very early on they decided not to do that they decided to roll the dice and terminate him and what happened was that the court found that he was he was and again i think that that goes to the point that we were not seeking additional wages we're only seeking his attorney's fees and that any interest that would have accrued on the wages they did find doing