you're a manager.
you supervise a group of subordinates.
when you were hired, the human resources department, eager to hire you, reduced your benefits package in order to qualify you for the position and bring you aboard. this move was fully explained in the company newsletter.
a subordinate insists that he can no longer do his job because, due to the aforementioned technicality in the firm's hiring policies, you shouldn't be a manager.
the h.r. dept. is happy with its decision. you are happy to work there. your subordinate is not.
who wins? who walks?
lawsuit challenges clinton eligibility
a state department employee has filed a lawsuit today in federal court against newly sworn-in secretary of state hillary clinton claiming she is constitutionally ineligible to serve.
judicial watch, a public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, announced today that it is pursuing the complaint in u.s. district court in washington, d.c, on behalf of u.s. foreign service officer and state department employee david c. rodearmel.
rodearmel, a resident of virginia, maintains clinton is constitutionally ineligible to serve as secretary of state and that he cannot serve under her because doing so would go against the oath he took as a foreign service officer in 1991 to "support and defend" and "bear true faith and allegiance" to the constitution of the united states.
... the constitutional quandary arises from a clause that forbids members of the senate from being appointed to civil office, such as the secretary of state, if the "emoluments," or salary and benefits, of the office were increased during the senator's term.
... according to the lawsuit, the "emoluments" of the office of secretary of state increased as many as three times since clinton began her second, six-year senate term in january 2007. on jan. 1, 2007, the secretary of state's salary increased to $186,600. in 2008, it increased to $191,300, and on jan. 1, 2009, it increased again to $196,700.
... the lawsuit acknowledges that congress tried to shirk the constitutional exclusion with a "saxbe fix," reducing the clinton's salary to the level in effect before jan. 1,  but it states that the legislation "does not and cannot change the historical fact that the 'compensation and other emoluments' of the office of the u.s. secretary of state increased during defendant clinton's tenure in the u.s. senate. ..."
ianal, but i say you win and the subordinate walks (or just learns to suck it up). the subordinate is not in a position to contest the h.r. dept.'s efforts to comply with its own policies. that is between the h.r. dept. and you. nor can the subordinate demonstrate material harm from your hiring in itself. perhaps if the subordinate was in fact a rival for your position ...