Opinion ID: 2575877
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The State undertook a voluntary obligation.

Text: ¶ 43 Nevertheless, a contract in a public employment setting may also arise if the State voluntarily undertake[s] an additional duty that it would otherwise have no obligation to perform. [40] Plaintiffs argue that their contractual rights exist because State agencies did exactly that in offering the Program to their employees. ¶ 44 The State, on the other hand, argues that in permitting agencies to choose whether to offer employees the benefits of the Program, those agencies failed to undertake an additional obligation beyond statutory terms, [41] since the statutory scheme authorized the offer. The State misinterprets prior Utah cases on the issue. The cases to which the State cites, namely, Buckner v. Kennard, [42] Knight v. Salt Lake County, [43] and Hom v. Utah Department of Public Safety, [44] deal specifically with changes to prospective compensation, hiring procedures, or other employment structures controlled only by statute and which the State required the involved agencies to adopt. The statutory terms at issue in those instances were not regarding additional duties that the agencies would otherwise have no obligation to perform. [45] ¶ 45 With the Program at issue in this case, however, state agencies had no obligation to offer the incentives found in Utah Code section 67-19-14.2 to their employees. Instead, the Legislature specifically constructed the statute to state that [a]n agency may offer the Unused Sick Leave Retirement Option Program to its employees. [46] Therefore, in choosing to offer the Program, state agencies volunteered to undertake the additional duty of providing enhanced retirement benefits in exchange for the employee taking fewer sick days and for staying with the State until retirement. This constituted a valid offer to redeem unused sick leave hours upon retirement. ¶ 46 Nevertheless, the critical question remains at what point in time employees are able to accept the offer. As described above, employees may not accept this offer until retirement. The State's offer of various payout options, specifically, the 401(k), cash-out, or medical and life insurance coverage, can only be accepted when employees retire. At that point, an employee chooses how to redeem accumulated unused sick leave from the options then available, and the State is bound. Until that time, however, the State retains the ability to modify terms of the offer as needed or prudent. [47] ¶ 47 Therefore, although the State voluntarily undertook an obligation to employees who bank unused sick leave to allow those employees to eventually redeem unused sick leave hours for value, the State's offer does not lock in the method of pay-out until retirement. Consequently, it cannot be said that the State voluntarily undertook an obligation to permit employees to redeem 100% of their unused sick leave hours for medical and life insurance. Absent this specific voluntary obligation by the State, employees have no protectable property interest in redeeming all or any of those hours for medical and life insurance until they reach actual retirement and make the appropriate election from among the then-available options.