salary or quote gratuitous severance payments dixon establishes at least three propositions one employee can be discharged even though he continues to receive uninterrupted pay benefits to a way jacqueline will lie even mor play differencies uninterrupted post destroyed payments if he is not paid as a group which is including vacation time on the day of discharge three if posed to start payments are not labeled wages or occasion such post discharge payments are gratuitous the defendant appears only to reject the rd proposition in this budget the contents the non working notice paper made seventeen through twenty four was in fact wages the district court should have simply applied to extended engine summary judgment or mr analysis broader legislature was trying to avoid people being cheated out of vacation pay by mucking with the termination date that is not at all the situation we have here your client was paid his vacation pay the case you rely on was factually very different just as it district court said and did involve an effort to label payments as fake patient pay which were not in fact vacation pay and so the s j c was concerned about the cheating of people to stop them from getting vacation pay that they were instead your argument would lead to employers not doing exactly what judge chaotic said which is your terminations and date is in the future or in one week or two weeks we're going to pay you during that time period we are going to pay you your salary and your vacation pay through that time here and you would discourage employers from doing that by saying even if you do that you are subject to this statute to travel damages how could the legislature possibly have the intended result that you are arguing for that was made on the day that the employer deemed and told him was the date of terminations but you want to hold employers liable under treble damages regardless of that i think the only way the district court without bringing on all the unilateral right to to dictate or designate any arbitrary time has expired how does how does that hurt the employee i mean he would have been even better if they said one month will go now battle that it was extra mon but aren't you a centrally saying that this would have been a completely different scenario if they had taken away all of devices told him he didn't need to work but had him report there every day and his usual hours and put him in an office bind south to just get there with the we take all your devices and here's your check we're paying you there are other option would have been to say were your true she is effective the next week you know we're giving you notice but you're on call you know you don't have to report to work something right thank you we'll hear from your opponent you have read her sometimes attorney craig you can get your device at this time audio and video and attorney blank if you could please introduce yourself for the and may please the court my name is shira blank appearing on behalf of the poly broadridge financial solutions or honors this case presents both a straightforward application of the wage act a scenario that arises nearly every day and district judge the rukun recognized both of these things in allowing drawbridges motion for summary judgment and deny mr now says and we respectfully request that the decision be it be affirmed the appellant go to the very heart of this matter and the fact that he continues to be unable to articulate why an employer cannot give an at will employee advance notice of a determination and pay them through that time is very t everything owed him the exact amount owed to him and a review of his last paycheck demonstrates that he got benefits that only an employee would have gotten car allowance for a one k life insurance health and dental and that and vision benefit f s a that's the entirety of what happened here and importantly almost everything i said is undisputed as we mentioned this scenario happens every day in various workplaces and it actually also happened in dixon the only case that mr narr now is continues to rely on in that case the piece that also got a notice of an impending terminations the issue was that he wasn't paid his big he should pay on the date that they actually told him he was discharged in and notified him of that interpretations and your honor is recognize those they go further adopting his reading of the statute would result in a holding that prohibits companies from giving employees advance notice of their trauma nishan and paying them in the interim it would mean that an employer cannot do what your honour's characterizes the humane thing they want to they can't tell an employee you're being fired but we're retaining you as an employee for a few weeks so that you can look for a job so that you can continue to collect a paycheck so that you can get health benefits for your family for a few me it would effectively change the definition of the term employee and it would mean that employees still been for a load or told not to work they kept on payroll because of a lot down due to a global pandemic not only have viab and now have a claim for trouble damages it would also up through the tenets of employment at will as we know it simply because mr announced appears to take issue with that concept at will employment means that either party can terminate the relationship an employer can say you're employed i'm going to continue to pay you but please stay home don't do work do what ever you want during that time surf the internet look at the wall listen to the birds if the employee doesn't like it they can resign and that's what  not to prevent employers from doing the courteous thing and providing employees of the advanced notice of their terminations and giving them some dignity and respect during an awful process rather than throwing them out on the street and telling them you're fired get out  payroll or worse to punish an employer for doing that s mr now it has argued to this court that the date of his discharge to be deemed to be the date he was notified that he would be the statute says any employee discharged from such employment shall be paid in full on the day of his discharge in this situation the statute contemplates that the employer is deciding to discharge the employee and by extension the employer your would determine when the employee is being discharged and mr now it makes a lot of the statute using the term discharged rather than terminations your honors we can all agree that the terms discharge and terminations are used interchangeably all the time and for mr nouns to argue that there is a difference between them is mere wordplay that does particularly one holding a high position like mr nelson was he was leading a group and making two hundred and fifty thousand dollars a year to turn in his company documents so that he doesn't have access to confidential information and its trade secrets anymore  preparing to fire him and the other employees who are going to be impacted by this reorganization there are contemporaneous e mails which said that they would ultimately all be fired on may th but they would be given a week's notice on may  broadridge notifies mr announced that it's eliminating his position affected may th one week later and that he would remain on its benefit plan and be paid through that date mr announced admits that he was told that he would be paid through that date he's given a written severance agreement which says no matter whether or not sign this your employment is ending may th and if he wanted to sign it he would have gotten eighteen weeks of severance and notably a review of the severance agreement shows that the eighteen weeks of severance started nineteen he's paid everything that is owed to him this is also undisputed as of that date he's not doing anything further and in all of this in this commonplace situation the only thing we have just the partons process position is unsubstantiated belief misunderstood something of the me seven hundred dollars meaning that mr interpretation is shown to be demonstrably false in the face of the severance agreement his last paycheck on may th and this mound of contemporaneous evidence this is exactly the type of case that summary documents and the case list eight may th date isn't that correct that well you are that's that's not quite correct there's there's two contemporaneous documents there's a severance agreement