The Great One

ive in the determination. * * * Furthermore, an employer’s practices can provide context for and help inform the determination. * * *

The question of whether a written manual is ambiguous is a determination of law that we review de novo. * * * In this case, we cannot agree with the trial court that the terms of Jogbra’s manual are unambiguous such that, as a matter of law, Dillon’s status was not modified, especially considered in light of the conflicting record before the court regarding Jogbra’s employment practices. Cf. Farnum * * * (“Given the contents of [employer’s] handbook provisions, we conclude that it was, at best from [employer’s] perspective, a jury question as to whether the handbooks created an implied contract.”) * * *.

Notwithstanding the disclaimer contained on the first page of the manual quoted above, the manual goes on to establish in Policy No. 720 an elaborate system governing employee discipline and discharge. It states as its purpose: “To establish Champion Jogbra policy for all employees.” It states that actions will be carried out “in a fair and consistent manner.” * * * It provides that “the Corrective Action Policy requires management to use training and employee counseling to achieve the desired actions of employees.” * * * It establishes three categories of violations of company policy and corresponding actions to be generally taken in each case. It delineates progressive steps to be taken for certain types of cases, including “unsatisfactory quality of work,” and time periods governing things such as how long a reprimand is considered “active.” Cf. Taylor * * * (noting that manual provisions stating, among other things, that employees would be treated fairly and uniformly, that progressive discipline should be used except in the case of serious misconduct, and listing circumstances that may result in termination were sufficient to support jury’s determination that employer unilaterally modified at-will arrangement such...