Melba began work for Acme Company in 1975 as a filing clerk. Thirty years later she had risen to be comptroller. At a thirty-year celebration party, her boss, Mr. Holder, said, “Melba, I hope you work here for along time, and you can retire at any time, but if you decide to retire, on account of your years of good service, the company will pay you a monthly pension of $2,000.” Melba continued to work for another two years, then retired. The company paid the pension for three years and then, in an economic downturn, stopped. When Melba sued, the company claimed it was not obligated to her because the pension was of past consideration. What is your opinion on this situation? What will be the result?
Workers are entitled to get the pension from the company where they worked. When specifying the conditions of pension if it was not mentioned that Melba will not get pension during the economic downturn than Melba should get a pension as it does not matter what is the economic situation is and the court should order the Acme company to pay Melba her dues. On the other hand, if it was mentioned to the Melba that she will not get the pension during economic downturn than She should not demand the pension during the economic downturn. Usually, Workers' pension does not depend on the economic situation as it is their right to get the pension regardless of the economic situation.
Melba began work for Acme Company in 1975 as a filing clerk. Thirty years later she...