Opinion ID: 2516473
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Gucci's Employee Handbook

Text: In contrast to Kinoshita, in which the employer made specific written guarantees of continued employment, Gucci's employee handbook clearly stated that Plaintiff's employment was at-will and could be terminated at any time with or without notice. The clear and unambiguous language of Gucci's employee handbook stated: Your employment with Gucci is at will. This means that it may be terminated by you or by Gucci with or without cause and with or without notice. In addition, Plaintiff admitted that she was advised and aware at the time of hiring that she was an at-will employee. Plaintiff acknowledged and agreed in writing several times that her employment could be terminated at any time, with or without notice, with or without warning, and with or without reason. Plaintiff argues that Gucci deviated from the termination procedures established in the employee handbook and that such a departure constituted a breach of an implied contract. Gucci's handbook stated in relevant part: On some occasions when your performance does not meet Gucci standards, you may be given a verbal warning by your supervisor or manager. Two or more such verbal warnings will result in a written Incident Report which will be discussed with you by your supervisor and become a permanent part of your employee file. The written Incident Report may also result without prior verbal warnings, if in the opinion of your supervisor or manager, your conduct warrants such action. Serious discipline including suspension or termination, may result if: 1) in your supervisor's or manager's opinions such discipline is warranted or, 2) you have received two or more written Incident Reports within a calendar year. While your employment with Gucci may be terminated without cause by Gucci or by you, the following represent some of the conduct which could result in serious disciplinary action up to and including termination:.... [e]xcessive absence or lateness and unexcused lateness or absence.... [and] [b]elow standard job performance[.] (Emphasis added.) Based upon this language, Gucci's employee handbook does not require a written warning before termination. The handbook provision makes it plain that termination is not predicated exclusively upon receipt of two or more written incident reports. An employee may be terminated without receiving a written report if, in the estimation her supervisor, such discipline is warranted. Indeed, Perreira, Plaintiff's supervisor, determined that termination was appropriate for Plaintiff. As discussed, Plaintiff was admittedly tardy to work on many occasions and was tardy in faxing her inventory reports to Gucci's warehouse. In addition, in Perreira's opinion, the quality of Plaintiff's operating reports for Gucci's Maui store and her dress and grooming standards fell below Gucci's standards. Plaintiff does not assert any other evidence that Defendants selectively applied the policies set forth in the employee handbook. In any event, Gucci cannot be said to have behaved in such a way as to induce reliance by Plaintiff. Under these circumstances, we cannot say that Gucci's employee handbook gave rise to the possibility of contractual recovery. Because Gucci's handbook did not modify its right to discharge employees, the circuit court correctly granted summary judgment in favor of Gucci.