## Facts

- Kevin Geysen was hired in 2005 as an at-will business development manager for Securitas, paid salary plus commissions on contracts he procured.
- His compensation referenced a company sales incentive plan governing when commissions were payable.
- In 2006, Securitas revised the plan to provide that commissions cease upon termination, except commissions invoiced before the employee’s termination; commissions were generally payable only after services were performed and invoiced.
- Geysen procured several contracts shortly before Securitas terminated him in May 2008 for alleged improper business practices.
- Many of the procured contracts had not been invoiced by the time of termination, and Securitas did not pay commissions on those contracts.
- Geysen alleged he had earned the commissions by procuring the contracts and that the stated reason for termination was pretextual to avoid paying commissions.

## Issues

1. Whether an at-will commission plan conditioning payment on client invoicing before termination violates public policy or Conn. Gen. Stat. § 31-72 when invoicing has not occurred.
2. Whether allegations that the employer terminated the employee as a pretext to avoid commissions state a claim for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing.
3. Whether termination to avoid paying commissions supports a wrongful discharge claim under the public policy exception to at-will employment.

## Decision

- The court reversed the judgment for Geysen on the § 31-72 wage claim and held the commission provision enforceable.
- The court reversed the striking of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing claim and reinstated that count.
- The court affirmed the striking of the wrongful discharge claim.
- The case was remanded for further proceedings consistent with these rulings.

## Legal Principles

- Connecticut wage statutes, including § 31-72, provide remedies for withholding wages due under the parties’ agreement; they do not define how wages are earned or invalidate clear contractual conditions precedent to earning commissions.
- A commission plan may lawfully condition commissions on post-sale events, including invoicing before termination; if the condition precedent does not occur, the commissions are not “earned” or “due” under the contract for wage-statute purposes.
- Every contract carries an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing; a party may breach it by exercising contractual rights (including at-will termination) in bad faith to deprive the other party of the agreement’s benefits.
- Allegations that an employer terminated an at-will employee on a pretext to avoid paying otherwise payable commissions are sufficient, at the pleading stage, to state an implied-covenant claim.
- The public policy wrongful discharge tort is narrow and requires a clear public policy independent of contract and statutory remedies; termination to avoid unearned, contractually contingent commissions does not, without more, satisfy that requirement.

## Conclusion

The Connecticut Supreme Court enforced a commission plan requiring invoicing before termination as a condition to earning commissions, limiting § 31-72 to wages due under the contract, while allowing an implied-covenant claim to proceed based on alleged bad-faith termination to avoid commission payments and rejecting a separate public policy wrongful discharge theory.


Geysen v. Securitas Sec. Servs. USA, Inc., 322 Conn. 385, 142 A.3d 227 (2016)