Sutherland Global Services Update

Cool, everybody!

Thank you to everyone who has responded, however you’ve chosen to respond.  I’ve talked to a number of people about this both off line and on, and I’m still looking into the situation.  Probably not a lot will happen on a Sunday, so if you read this and haven’t responded yet, please do.

A few have chimed in to say that the Sutherland abuses are nothing new.  That’s certainly true, even the original organization attempt was a while ago, but the letters are only coming out now, right before the deadline.

What’s fishie is that the letter states that the Department of Labor has done and audit and determined that some of us are owed back pay, but that the corrective transaction will happen between the employee and Sutherland’s own H.R. department.  That, and the fact that it says I’ve got X dollars of money coming back to me, “less applicable withholdings and liquidated damages” of . . . .  X dollars exactly.

So maybe the first seeming discrepancy is normal and the second is a product of my own non-lawyer-ish interpretation of legalese.  Maybe, but it strikes me as odd that the DOL performs an audit and the corrections should happen directly through the employer.  It seems like the kind of thing that the DOL would handle directly, but who knows in Bush’s White House. . .

Besides which, I’ve not previously been informed of any lawsuit that I’m aware of.  This letter seems to spend two paragraphs telling you “you may already have won x dollars!” and then the last para is spent saying in as few words as possible that you waive any right to sue Sutherland by taking this money.

So, if you know anything, hip me to it, please!  Throw a comment in the comments section or use the “Contact Me” link in the masthead.

By Tommy Belknap

Owner, developer, editor of DragonFlyEye.Net, Tom Belknap is also a freelance journalist for The 585 lifestyle magazine. He lives in the Rochester area with his wife and son.

5 replies on “Sutherland Global Services Update”

They may be having financial problems. They couldn’t pay anyone this Friday
I am off today (June 29) They made direct deposits of checks to everyone and promptly
withdrew the money form everyone’s checking accounts causing all sorts of havoc
I have the lawsuit and am trying to decide how to handle it. It certainly is a really

sleazy company. I would really like to bring in a union here to try and organize them.

Marc tells me you are going to be a Dad!!! congratulations!!!!

Well, now! That’s interesting news.

I seem to recall Sutherland having a similar crisis whilst I worked there, but I don’t really remember, exactly. To be honest, I’ve worked for a lot of companies that have had troubles paying the bills. . . .

I’ll need to look into this. Thanks for the tip!

What a stupid reply from James F. The error was caused by the payroll vendor (ADP) being able to make the automatic deposits to the banks and could not be corrected in time for the scheduled payday. The company came out with an e-mail messgae to all employees on the day before payday indicating the problem. Everyone received their checks as usual. The only difference was those who signed up for automatic deposits received a live check instead of the receipt.

meant to say that the vendor (ADP) NOT being able to make the automatic deposits to the banks

Well, now, hold on there a minute. ADP deposits a whole mess of checks into a whole mess of bank accounts for a whole mess of companies. How is it that this affects only Sutherland? Had it affected more than one company, you could be assured it would affect tonnes and make the news. It didn’t.

Meanwhile, Sutherland has not had this problem only once. I also remember going through a few check-issuing companies while working for Suth. That in and of itself does not prove much, but it does suggest that perhaps Sutherland is a bad bet for financial institutions.

So, no. This doesn’t mean that the walls of Jericho are falling. But it is an interesting aside to what is an ongoing drama with Sutherland’s current and former employees.

Comments are closed.