This can happen, for example, when a delay in the delivery of goods delays payment of the commission, although the commission actually accrued to the sales representative at the time the sale was made. Apparently, to recover a commission, a sales representative often must sue in the domicile of the principal, and bear the added costs of attending depositions and trial in another state. To ensure that sales representatives receive the commissions to which they are entitled, it has been suggested that prompt payment of posttermination commissions, and penalties for failure to make the payment, be statutorily mandated. The parties disagree over what the terms of plaintiff's employment contract were. Plaintiff alleges that he entered into an oral contract with defendants that provided that commissions were due upon delivery of the sold furniture to the customer.
Defendants dispute the existence of the oral contract.
Under the facts as presented by plaintiff, pursuant to the terms of the parties' oral contract, plaintiff was entitled to payment of his commission on sold furniture upon the customer taking delivery of the furniture. The practical effect of the letter is to preclude plaintiff from receiving commissions that he would have been entitled to under the parties' original agreement. In other words, the letter effectively constitutes a waiver of plaintiff's right to payment of commissions that came due after he ceased working for defendants. However, subparagraph 4 protects a sales representative's right to post-termination receipt of commissions. Defendants may not redefine when commissions come due in order to nullify subparagraph 8 and thwart the clear intent of the Legislature.