Carmen NIETO v. CLARK'S MARKET, INC.

<div data-spec-version="0.0.3dev" data-generated-on="2024-06-07">
 <div class="generated-from-iceberg vlex-toc">
 <link href="https://doc-stylesheets.vlex.com/ldml-xml.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"></link>
 <div class="ldml-decision"><div class="ldml-decision"><div href="/vid/887098151" data-vids="887098151" class="ldml-header header ldml-header content__heading content__heading--depth1" data-content-heading-label="Header"><p class="ldml-metadata"><span class="ldml-cite"><b class="ldml-bold">488 P.3d 1140</b></span></p><p class="ldml-metadata"><b class="ldml-bold"><span class="ldml-party"><span class="ldml-name">Carmen NIETO</span>, <span class="ldml-role">Petitioner</span></span>,</b></p><p class="ldml-metadata"><b class="ldml-bold">v.</b><b class="ldml-bold"><span class="ldml-party"><span class="ldml-name">CLARK'S MARKET, INC.</span>, <span class="ldml-role">Respondent</span></span>.</b></p><p class="ldml-metadata"><b class="ldml-bold">Supreme Court <span class="ldml-cite">Case No. 19SC553</span> </b></p><p class="ldml-metadata"><b class="ldml-bold"><span class="ldml-court">Supreme Court of Colorado</span>.</b></p><p class="ldml-metadata"><span class="ldml-date"><b class="ldml-bold">June 14, 2021</b></span></p></div><div class="ldml-counsel header ldml-header content__heading content__heading--depth1" data-content-heading-label="Counsel"><p data-paragraph-id="143" class="ldml-paragraph no-indent mt-2"><span data-paragraph-id="143" data-sentence-id="143" class="ldml-sentence">Attorneys for <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-role">Petitioner</span></span>: <span class="ldml-lawfirm">Albrechta & Albrechta, LLC</span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-lawyer">Eleni K. Albrechta</span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-lawyer">David T. Albrechta</span></span> Durango, Colorado, <span class="ldml-lawfirm">Swain Law, LLC</span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-lawyer">Hunter A. Swain Denver</span></span>, Colorado</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="303" class="ldml-paragraph no-indent mt-2"><span data-paragraph-id="303" data-sentence-id="303" class="ldml-sentence">Attorneys for <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-role">Respondent</span></span>: <span class="ldml-lawfirm">Bechtel Santo & Severn</span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-lawyer">Michael C. Santo</span></span>, Grand Junction, Colorado</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="395" class="ldml-paragraph no-indent mt-2"><span data-paragraph-id="395" data-sentence-id="395" class="ldml-sentence">Attorneys for <span class="ldml-lawyerrole">Amici Curiae</span> Colorado Civil Justice League, Denver Metro Chamber of Commerce, and National Federation of Independent Business: <span class="ldml-lawfirm">Husch Blackwell LLP</span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-lawyer">Christopher L. Ottele</span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-lawyer">Stacey M. Bowman Denver</span></span>, Colorado</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="613" class="ldml-paragraph no-indent mt-2"><span data-paragraph-id="613" data-sentence-id="613" class="ldml-sentence">Attorneys for <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-lawyerrole">Amicus Curiae</span> Colorado Department of Labor and Employment</span>, <span class="ldml-entity">Division of Labor Standards and Statistics</span>: <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-lawyer">Philip J. Weiser</span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity">Attorney General</span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-lawyer">John August Lizza</span></span>, First Assistant <span class="ldml-entity">Attorney General</span>, Denver, Colorado</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="835" class="ldml-paragraph no-indent mt-2"><span data-paragraph-id="835" data-sentence-id="835" class="ldml-sentence">Attorneys for <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-lawyerrole">Amicus Curiae</span> Colorado <span class="ldml-entity">Plaintiff</span> <span class="ldml-entity">Employment Lawyers Association</span></span>: <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-lawfirm">Law Office of Susan R. Hahn</span> LLC</span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-lawyer">Susan R. Hahn</span></span>, Littleton, <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_835"><span class="ldml-cite">Colorado Law</span></a></span> Office of David Lichtenstein</span>, LLC, <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-lawyer">David Lichtenstein</span></span>, Denver, Colorado <span class="ldml-lawfirm">Jester Gibson & Moore, LLP</span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-lawyer">Brian T. Moore</span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-lawyer">Rachel Tumin</span></span>, Denver, Colorado</span></p></div><h2 class="ldml-opinionheading"><span data-paragraph-id="1132" class="ldml-paragraph "><span class="ldml-judgepanel"><span data-paragraph-id="1132" data-sentence-id="1132" class="ldml-sentence">En Banc</span></span></span></h2><div class="ldml-opinion"><p data-paragraph-id="1139" class="ldml-paragraph no-indent mt-4"><span class="ldml-opinionauthor content__heading content__heading--depth1" data-content-heading-label="Opinion (HART)"><span data-paragraph-id="1139" data-sentence-id="1139" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">JUSTICE <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-judge">HART</span></span> <span class="ldml-opiniontype">delivered <span class="ldml-entity">the Opinion of <span class="ldml-entity">the Court</span></span></span></span>.</span></span></p><p data-paragraph-id="1187" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="1187" data-sentence-id="1187" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_1187"><span class="ldml-cite">¶1</span></a></span> In <span class="ldml-entity">2003</span>, the General Assembly added subsection <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">8-4-101<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(14)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(III)</span>, C.R.S.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">2020</span>)</span></a></span>, of the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_1187"><span class="ldml-cite">Colorado Wage Claim Act <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-quotation quote">"CWCA"</span>)</span></span></a></span> to expressly define <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"vacation pay"</span> as a type of protected wages and compensation.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="1187" data-sentence-id="1395" class="ldml-sentence">Today, for the first time since its adoption, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> address the meaning of <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_1395"><span class="ldml-cite">subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(14)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(III)</span></span></a></span> and its relationship with other provisions of the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_1395"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span> head on.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="1554" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="1554" data-sentence-id="1554" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_1554"><span class="ldml-cite">¶2</span></a></span> When Clark's Market, Inc.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-localname">CMI</span>"</span>)</span> terminated its longtime employee, <span class="ldml-entity">Carmen Nieto</span>, it declined to pay Nieto any of her accrued but unused vacation pay, citing its policy that an employee who is <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"discharged for any reason or do<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[es]</span> not give proper notice ... will forfeit all earned vacation pay benefits."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="1554" data-sentence-id="1862" class="ldml-sentence">Nieto argues that CMI's policy requiring forfeiture of her earned vacation pay violates the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_1862"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="1959" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="1959" data-sentence-id="1959" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_1959"><span class="ldml-cite">¶3</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-entity">We</span> conclude that, although the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_1959"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span> does not entitle an employee to vacation pay, when an employer chooses to provide it, such pay is no less protected than other wages or <span class="ldml-pagenumber" data-rep="P.3d" data-id="pagenumber_2134" data-val="1142" data-page_type="bracketed_cite" data-vol="488"></span> compensation and, thus, cannot be forfeited once earned.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="1959" data-sentence-id="2192" class="ldml-sentence">Accordingly, under the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_2192"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span>, all vacation pay that is earned and determinable must be paid at the end of the employment relationship, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-signal"><i class="ldml-italics">see</i></span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">§§ 8-4-101<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(14)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(III)</span>, - 109<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span>, C.R.S.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">2020</span>)</span></a></span></span>, and any term of an agreement that purports to forfeit earned vacation pay is void, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-signal"><i class="ldml-italics">see</i></span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 8-4-121, C.R.S.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">2020</span>)</span></a></span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="1959" data-sentence-id="2495" class="ldml-sentence">Because <span class="ldml-entity">the court of appeals</span> erred in concluding otherwise, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> reverse.</span></p><div class="ldml-section"><section class="ldml-heading content__heading content__heading--depth1" data-ordinal_end="1" data-format="upper_case_roman_numeral" data-parsed="true" data-confidences="very_high" data-content-heading-label="I. Facts and Procedural History" data-id="heading_2566" data-value="I. Facts and Procedural History" data-specifier="I" id="heading_2566" data-types="background" data-ordinal_start="1"><span data-paragraph-id="2566" class="ldml-paragraph "><b class="ldml-bold"><span data-paragraph-id="2566" data-sentence-id="2566" class="ldml-sentence">I.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="2566" data-sentence-id="2569" class="ldml-sentence">Facts and Procedural History</span></b></span></section><p data-paragraph-id="2597" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="2597" data-sentence-id="2597" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_2597"><span class="ldml-cite">¶4</span></a></span> Nieto worked at CMI for eight-and-a-half years until <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> was fired in <span class="ldml-entity">March 2017</span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="2597" data-sentence-id="2682" class="ldml-sentence">During that time, <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> earned vacation pay in accordance with the policy in CMI's employee handbook.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="2597" data-sentence-id="2782" class="ldml-sentence">According to Nieto, at the time of her termination, <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> had accumulated at least 136 hours of unused paid vacation, worth a total of $2,244.00.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="2925" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="2925" data-sentence-id="2925" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_2925"><span class="ldml-cite">¶5</span></a></span> Under CMI's policy, <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"vacation time is earned during the anniversary year previous to <span class="ldml-parenthetical">[when]</span> it is actually taken,"</span> and the amount earned each year <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"is based on ... length of employment,"</span> as delineated in the policy.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="2925" data-sentence-id="3144" class="ldml-sentence">Additionally, the policy specifies that <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[v]</span>acation time cannot be carried over from year to year"</span> and <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"must be taken in the twelve- <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(12)</span> month period following the date it is earned."</span><a href="#note-fr1" class="ldml-noteanchor" id="note-ref-fr1">1</a></span> <span data-paragraph-id="2925" data-sentence-id="3329" class="ldml-sentence">And, central to this appeal, the policy includes a clause forfeiting unused vacation pay upon separation:</span></p><blockquote data-paragraph-id="b_3434" class="ldml-blockquote"><span data-sentence-id="3434" class="ldml-sentence">In the event you voluntarily leave Clark's Market and give at least two <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(2)</span> weeks written notice, you will receive vacation benefits earned as of your last anniversary date but not taken by the date of separation. ...</span> <span data-sentence-id="3652" class="ldml-sentence">If you are discharged for any reason or do not give proper notice, you will forfeit all earned vacation pay benefits.</span></blockquote><p data-paragraph-id="3769" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="3769" data-sentence-id="3769" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_3769"><span class="ldml-cite">¶6</span></a></span> In light of the forfeiture clause, CMI did not include Nieto's accrued but unused vacation pay in her final paycheck, and it refused her written <span class="ldml-entity">demand for payment</span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="3769" data-sentence-id="3937" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-signal"><i class="ldml-italics">See</i></span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_3769"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 8-4-109<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="3769" data-sentence-id="3955" class="ldml-sentence">Nieto then sued CMI for withholding her vacation pay, asserting that <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_3955"><span class="ldml-cite">subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(14)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(III)</span></span></a></span> required CMI to <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"pay upon separation from employment all vacation pay earned and determinable in accordance with the <span class="ldml-parenthetical">[employee handbook]</span>"</span> and that the forfeiture clause purporting to waive her right to such payment was void under <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_3955"><span class="ldml-cite">section 8-4-121</span></a></span> of the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_3955"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="4306" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="4306" data-sentence-id="4306" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_4306"><span class="ldml-cite">¶7</span></a></span> CMI moved to dismiss Nieto's complaint under <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">C.R.C.P. 12<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(b)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(5)</span></span></a></span> for failure to state a claim, and <span class="ldml-entity">the district court</span> granted the motion.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="4306" data-sentence-id="4445" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">The court</span> reasoned that because the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_4445"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"clearly and unambiguously gives employers the right to enter into agreements with its employees regarding vacation pay,"</span> CMI's forfeiture clause was valid and Nieto was thus <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"not entitled to any accrued vacation pay."</span></span></p><p data-paragraph-id="4704" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="4704" data-sentence-id="4704" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_4704"><span class="ldml-cite">¶8</span></a></span> Nieto appealed, and a division of <span class="ldml-entity">the court of appeals</span> affirmed.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="4704" data-sentence-id="4772" class="ldml-sentence">The division ultimately concluded that, because CMI fired Nieto, her vacation pay—despite being earned—had not <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"vested"</span> under CMI's policy.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="4704" data-sentence-id="4912" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">See</span> </i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:nietovclarksmarket,inc,2019coa98" data-prop-ids="sentence_4772"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Nieto v. Clark's Market, Inc.</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">2019 COA 98</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_4772"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 17</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:–––p3d––––" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_4982"><span class="ldml-cite">––– P.3d ––––</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-quotation quote"><span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">"Nieto's right to compensation for accrued but unused vacation pay depends on <span class="ldml-entity">the parties</span>' employment agreement.</span> <span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">And that agreement unequivocally says that the vacation pay <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> seeks wasn't <i class="ldml-italics">vested</i> given the circumstances under which <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> left <span class="ldml-parenthetical">[CMI]</span>'s employ."</span></span>)</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-referencenote">emphasis added</span>)</span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="4704" data-sentence-id="5260" class="ldml-sentence">In reaching that conclusion, the division reasoned that the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_5260"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"creates <span class="ldml-parenthetical">[no]</span> substantive right to payment for accrued but unused vacation time"</span> and <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"merely <span class="ldml-quotation quote">‘establishes minimal requirements concerning when and how <i class="ldml-italics">agreed</i> compensation must be paid.’</span> "</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="4704" data-sentence-id="5513" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:–––p3d––––"><span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">Id.</i></span></a></span> <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_5260"><span class="ldml-cite">at ¶ 11</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-cert">quoting</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/893368787" data-vids="893368787" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_5260"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Barnes v. Van Schaack Mortg.</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">787 P.2d 207, 210</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-court">Colo. App.</span> <span class="ldml-date">1990</span>)</span></a></span> )</span></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="5602" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="5602" data-sentence-id="5602" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_5602"><span class="ldml-cite">¶9</span></a></span> Nieto then petitioned for certiorari review, which <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> granted.<a href="#note-fr2" class="ldml-noteanchor" id="note-ref-fr2">2</a></span> <span class="ldml-pagenumber" data-rep="P.3d" data-id="pagenumber_5668" data-val="1143" data-page_type="bracketed_cite" data-vol="488"></span></p></div><div class="ldml-section"><section class="ldml-heading content__heading content__heading--depth1" data-ordinal_end="2" data-format="upper_case_roman_numeral" data-parsed="true" data-confidences="very_high" data-content-heading-label=" II. Analysis" data-id="heading_5668" data-value="II. Analysis" data-specifier="II" id="heading_5668" data-types="analysis" data-ordinal_start="2"><span data-paragraph-id="5668" class="ldml-paragraph "> <b class="ldml-bold"><span data-paragraph-id="5668" data-sentence-id="5669" class="ldml-sentence">II.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="5668" data-sentence-id="5673" class="ldml-sentence">Analysis</span></b></span></section><p data-paragraph-id="5681" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="5681" data-sentence-id="5681" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_5681"><span class="ldml-cite">¶10</span></a></span> After summarizing the applicable law, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> consider whether, as the division held, vacation pay that is earned and determinable must also have <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"vested"</span> to be covered by the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_5681"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="5681" data-sentence-id="5862" class="ldml-sentence">Because <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> disagree that vacation pay is subject to a separate vesting requirement, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> then consider whether forfeiture of earned vacation pay is otherwise permitted by the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_5862"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="5681" data-sentence-id="6041" class="ldml-sentence">Because <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> deem <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_6041"><span class="ldml-cite">subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(14)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(III)</span></span></a></span> ambiguous in that respect, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> turn to other evidence of <span class="ldml-entity">legislative intent</span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="5681" data-sentence-id="6157" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">We</span> review the statutory language and structure, the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_6157"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span>'s remedial purpose, <span class="ldml-entity">the statute</span>'s legislative history, and the relevant agency interpretation to conclude that the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_6157"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span> prohibits forfeiture of earned vacation pay.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="5681" data-sentence-id="6379" class="ldml-sentence">Consequently, when an employer chooses to provide vacation pay to its employees, an employee is entitled to receive all that is earned but still unpaid upon separation from employment, and any agreement purporting to forfeit earned vacation pay is void.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="5681" data-sentence-id="6633" class="ldml-sentence">And because Nieto's complaint therefore should not have been dismissed, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> reverse the judgment below and remand for further proceedings.</span></p><div class="ldml-section"><section class="ldml-heading content__heading content__heading--depth2" data-ordinal_end="1" data-format="upper_case_letters" data-parsed="true" data-confidences="very_high" data-content-heading-label="A. Applicable Law" data-id="heading_6770" data-value="A. Applicable Law" data-specifier="A" id="heading_6770" data-types="backgroundlaw" data-ordinal_start="1"><span data-paragraph-id="6770" class="ldml-paragraph "><b class="ldml-bold"><span data-paragraph-id="6770" data-sentence-id="6770" class="ldml-sentence">A.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="6770" data-sentence-id="6773" class="ldml-sentence">Applicable Law</span></b></span></section><div class="ldml-section"><section class="ldml-heading content__heading content__heading--depth3" data-ordinal_end="1" data-format="number" data-parsed="true" data-content-heading-label="1. Standard of Review and Principles of Statutory Interpretation" data-id="heading_6787" data-value="1. Standard of Review and Principles of Statutory Interpretation" data-specifier="1" id="heading_6787" data-ordinal_start="1"><span data-paragraph-id="6787" class="ldml-paragraph "><b class="ldml-bold"><span data-paragraph-id="6787" data-sentence-id="6787" class="ldml-sentence">1.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="6787" data-sentence-id="6790" class="ldml-sentence">Standard of Review and Principles of Statutory Interpretation</span></b></span></section><p data-paragraph-id="6851" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="6851" data-sentence-id="6852" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_6852"><span class="ldml-cite">¶11</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-entity">We</span> review de novo whether <span class="ldml-entity">the district court</span> properly dismissed a complaint for failure to state a claim.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="6851" data-sentence-id="6962" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:nortonvrockymountainplannedparenthood,inc,2018co3" data-prop-ids="sentence_6852"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Norton v. Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood, Inc.</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">2018 CO 3</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_6852"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 7</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/888574754" data-vids="888574754" class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">409 P.3d 331, 334</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="6851" data-sentence-id="7048" class="ldml-sentence">Like <span class="ldml-entity">the district court</span>, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> must accept all factual allegations in the complaint as true and view them in the light most favorable to <span class="ldml-entity">the plaintiff</span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="6851" data-sentence-id="7197" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/888574754" data-vids="888574754" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_7048"><span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">Id.</i></span></a></span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="6851" data-sentence-id="7201" class="ldml-sentence">In evaluating the sufficiency of the complaint, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> may also consider any documents, such as CMI's employee handbook here, that are attached as exhibits or incorporated by reference.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="6851" data-sentence-id="7383" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">See</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/888574754" data-vids="888574754" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_7201"><span class="ldml-cite">id.</span></a></span></i></span></span></p><p data-paragraph-id="7390" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="7390" data-sentence-id="7391" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_7391"><span class="ldml-cite">¶12</span></a></span> Questions of statutory interpretation are also subject to de novo review.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="7390" data-sentence-id="7469" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/886628317" data-vids="886628317" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_7391"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Mook v. Bd. of Cnty. Comm'rs</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">2020 CO 12</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_7391"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 24</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/886628317" data-vids="886628317" class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">457 P.3d 568, 574</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="7390" data-sentence-id="7536" class="ldml-sentence">When interpreting <span class="ldml-entity">a statute</span>, our primary aim is to effectuate <span class="ldml-entity">the legislature</span>'s intent.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="7390" data-sentence-id="7624" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:billbarrettcorpvlembke,2020co73" data-prop-ids="sentence_7536"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Bill Barrett Corp. v. Lembke</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">2020 CO 73</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_7536"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 14</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/895630172" data-vids="895630172" class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">474 P.3d 46, 49</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="7390" data-sentence-id="7689" class="ldml-sentence">To do so, <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-entity">we</span> look to the entire <span class="ldml-entity">statutory scheme</span> in order to give consistent, harmonious, and sensible effect to all of its parts, and <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> apply words and phrases in accordance with their plain and ordinary meanings."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="7390" data-sentence-id="7907" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/895630172" data-vids="895630172" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_7689"><span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">Id.</i></span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-cert">quoting</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:bloomingterraceno1,llcvkhblakest,llc,2019co58" data-prop-ids="sentence_7689"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Blooming Terrace No. 1, LLC v. KH Blake St., LLC</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">2019 CO 58</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_7689"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 11</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/895671414" data-vids="895671414" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_7689"><span class="ldml-cite">444 P.3d 749, 752</span></a></span> )</span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="7390" data-sentence-id="8009" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[W]</span>e do not add words to or subtract words from <span class="ldml-entity">a statute</span>."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="7390" data-sentence-id="8070" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:peopleexrelreinvmeagher,2020co56" data-prop-ids="sentence_8009"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">People ex rel. Rein v. Meagher</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">2020 CO 56</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_8009"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 22</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/886015661" data-vids="886015661" class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">465 P.3d 554, 560</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="7390" data-sentence-id="8139" class="ldml-sentence">And where the plain language is unambiguous, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> apply <span class="ldml-entity">the statute</span> as written.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="7390" data-sentence-id="8217" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:deltaairlines,incvscholle,2021co20" data-prop-ids="sentence_8139"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Delta Air Lines, Inc. v. Scholle</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">2021 CO 20</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_8139"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 13</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/895794105" data-vids="895794105" class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">484 P.3d 695, 699</span></a></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="8287" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="8287" data-sentence-id="8288" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_8288"><span class="ldml-cite">¶13</span></a></span> However, where <span class="ldml-entity">a statute</span> is ambiguous — that is, reasonably susceptible to more than one interpretation —<span class="ldml-entity">we</span> turn to other interpretive aids to discern <span class="ldml-entity">the legislature</span>'s intent.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="8287" data-sentence-id="8469" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/895666313" data-vids="895666313" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_8288"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Lewis v. Taylor</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">2016 CO 48</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_8288"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 27</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/895666313" data-vids="895666313" class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">375 P.3d 1205, 1210</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="8287" data-sentence-id="8525" class="ldml-sentence">Among these interpretive aids, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> include the language and structure of <span class="ldml-entity">the statute</span>, any relevant legislative history, and any reasonable <span class="ldml-entity">interpretation of <span class="ldml-entity">the statute</span></span> by an enforcing agency.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="8287" data-sentence-id="8717" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-signal"><i class="ldml-italics">See</i></span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_8525"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 2-4-203, C.R.S.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">2020</span>)</span></a></span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/890937017" data-vids="890937017" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_8525"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Gallion v. Colo. Dep't of Revenue</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">171 P.3d 217, 221-22</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-court">Colo.</span> <span class="ldml-date">2007</span>)</span></a></span></span>.</span></p></div><div class="ldml-section"><section class="ldml-heading content__heading content__heading--depth3" data-ordinal_end="2" data-format="number" data-parsed="true" data-content-heading-label="2. The CWCA" data-id="heading_8816" data-value="2. The CWCA" data-specifier="2" id="heading_8816" data-ordinal_start="2"><span data-paragraph-id="8816" class="ldml-paragraph "><b class="ldml-bold"><span data-paragraph-id="8816" data-sentence-id="8816" class="ldml-sentence">2.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="8816" data-sentence-id="8819" class="ldml-sentence">The <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_8819"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span></span></b></span></section><p data-paragraph-id="8827" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="8827" data-sentence-id="8828" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_8828"><span class="ldml-cite">¶14</span></a></span> The <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_8828"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span> is a comprehensive <span class="ldml-entity">statutory scheme</span> designed to ensure the payment of employees' earned wages in a timely manner.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="8827" data-sentence-id="8955" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:caglevmathersfamtr,2013co7" data-prop-ids="sentence_8828"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Cagle v. Mathers Fam. Tr.</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">2013 CO 7</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_8828"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 36</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/888310957" data-vids="888310957" class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">295 P.3d 460, 469</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="8827" data-sentence-id="9018" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-quotation quote">"Although the General Assembly has amended the <span class="ldml-parenthetical">[<span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_9018"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span>]</span> periodically, its basic design has endured since its adoption in <span class="ldml-entity">1901</span>."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="8827" data-sentence-id="9144" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/895386688" data-vids="895386688" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_9018"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Leonard v. McMorris</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">63 P.3d 323, 328</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-court">Colo.</span> <span class="ldml-date">2003</span>)</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="8827" data-sentence-id="9196" class="ldml-sentence">Among other things, it requires that an employer shall: <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span> pay its employees at regular intervals, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 8-4-103<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span>, C.R.S.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">2020</span>)</span></a></span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(2)</span> not make a deduction from an employee's wages unless permitted by one of the statutory exceptions, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 8-4-105<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span>, C.R.S.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">2020</span>)</span></a></span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span></span> and <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span> pay, upon separation from employment, all earned but unpaid compensation within a prescribed timeframe, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_9196"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 8-4-109</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="8827" data-sentence-id="9583" class="ldml-sentence">To effectuate these requirements, the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_9583"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span> imposes various penalties for employers' violations and offers multiple mechanisms for its enforcement.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="8827" data-sentence-id="9730" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">E.g.</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_9757,sentence_9583"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 8-4-109<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(b)</span>-<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(c)</span></span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">civil penalties and private right of action</span>)</span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <span class="ldml-pagenumber" data-rep="P.3d" data-id="pagenumber_9803" data-val="1144" data-page_type="bracketed_cite" data-vol="488"></span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_9583"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 8-4-111, C.R.S.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">2020</span>)</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(agency enforcement)</span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_9583"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 8-4-113, C.R.S.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">2020</span>)</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(fines)</span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_9583"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 8-4-114, C.R.S.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">2020</span>)</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(criminal penalties)</span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="8827" data-sentence-id="9932" class="ldml-sentence">Additionally, the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_9932"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span> nullifies any effort to circumvent its requirements by contract, providing that <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"any agreement ... by any employee purporting to waive or to modify such employee's rights in violation of <span class="ldml-entity">this article</span> shall be void."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="8827" data-sentence-id="10171" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_9932"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 8-4-121</span></a></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="10181" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="10181" data-sentence-id="10181" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_10181"><span class="ldml-cite">¶15</span></a></span> Before <span class="ldml-entity">2003</span>, the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_10181"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span> did not specifically reference vacation pay as a form of wages or compensation.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="10181" data-sentence-id="10287" class="ldml-sentence">Instead, it referred only generally to <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"wages"</span> and <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"compensation."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="10181" data-sentence-id="10354" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_10287"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 8-4-101<span class="ldml-headnoteanchor"><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(9)</span></span>, C.R.S.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">2002</span>)</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="10181" data-sentence-id="10383" class="ldml-sentence">In <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/890471967" data-vids="890471967" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_10383"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Hartman v. Freedman</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">197 Colo. 275</span>, <span class="ldml-cite">591 P.2d 1318, 1321</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">1979</span>)</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> held that vacation pay, when offered by an employer as <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"compensation for ... work,"</span> was protected under <span class="ldml-entity">the statute</span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="10181" data-sentence-id="10570" class="ldml-sentence">In <span class="ldml-entity">2003</span>, <span class="ldml-entity">the legislature</span> made extensive changes to the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_10570"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="10181" data-sentence-id="10631" class="ldml-sentence">Among other changes, <span class="ldml-entity">the amendments</span> added a separate subsection defining <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[b]</span>onuses or commissions"</span> as compensation, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 8-4-101<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(14)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(II)</span>, C.R.S.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">2020</span>)</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-referenceseparator">and</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_10631"><span class="ldml-cite">subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(14)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(III)</span></span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-cert">codifying</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/890471967" data-vids="890471967" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_10631"><span class="ldml-refname"><i class="ldml-italics">Hartman</i></span></a></span></span> by explicitly requiring employers to pay vacation pay upon separation from employment:</span></p><div class="ldml-embeddeddocument"><blockquote data-paragraph-id="b_10918" class="ldml-blockquote"><span data-sentence-id="10918" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-quotation quote">"Wages"</span> or <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"compensation"</span> means:</span></blockquote><blockquote data-paragraph-id="b_10950" class="ldml-blockquote"><span data-sentence-id="10950" class="ldml-sentence">....</span></blockquote><blockquote data-paragraph-id="b_10954" class="ldml-blockquote"><span data-sentence-id="10954" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(III)</span></span> <span data-sentence-id="10960" class="ldml-sentence">Vacation pay earned in accordance with the terms of any agreement.</span> <span data-sentence-id="11027" class="ldml-sentence">If an employer provides paid vacation for an employee, the employer shall pay upon separation from employment all vacation pay earned and determinable in accordance with the terms of any agreement between the employer and the employee.</span></blockquote></div><p data-paragraph-id="11262" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="11262" data-sentence-id="11262" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">Ch. 286, sec. 1</span></a></span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">,</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 8-4-101<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(8)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(III)</span></span></a></span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">,</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">2003 Colo. Sess. Laws 1850, 1852</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(currently codified at <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 8-4-101<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(14)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(III)</span></span></a></span> )</span></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="11381" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="11381" data-sentence-id="11381" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_11381"><span class="ldml-cite">¶16</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-entity">We</span> have since had only one occasion to construe <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_11381"><span class="ldml-cite">subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(14)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(III)</span></span></a></span>, in a context quite different from this one.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="11381" data-sentence-id="11502" class="ldml-sentence">In <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:inremarriageofcardona,2014co3,316p3d626" data-prop-ids="sentence_11502"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">In re Marriage of Cardona and Castro</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">2014 CO 3</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_11502"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 2</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:316p3d626,628" data-prop-ids="sentence_11502"><span class="ldml-cite">316 P.3d 626, 628</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> held that an enforceable interest in vacation pay accrued during a marriage constitutes marital property for purposes of the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_11502"><span class="ldml-cite">Uniform Dissolution of Marriage Act</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="11381" data-sentence-id="11743" class="ldml-sentence">In reaching that conclusion, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> explained <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"that such accrued leave is, in effect, a debt due to the employee as part of the compensation the employee has earned for work already performed."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="11381" data-sentence-id="11933" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:316p3d626,628" data-prop-ids="sentence_11933"><span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">Id.</i></span></a></span> at <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_11933"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 29</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:316p3d626,628" data-prop-ids="sentence_11933"><span class="ldml-cite">316 P.3d at 634</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="11381" data-sentence-id="11963" class="ldml-sentence">Therefore, <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[a]</span>n employee who has accrued such leave has already earned an enforceable right to the remuneration, and later receives this compensation when the employee either uses the time for a permissible purpose or is paid the value of the accrued leave."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="11381" data-sentence-id="12223" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:316p3d626,628" data-prop-ids="sentence_11963"><span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">Id.</i></span></a></span></span></p><p data-paragraph-id="12226" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="12226" data-sentence-id="12226" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_12226"><span class="ldml-cite">¶17</span></a></span> Because our ultimate concern in <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:inremarriageofcardona,2014co3,316p3d626" data-prop-ids="sentence_12226"><span class="ldml-refname"><i class="ldml-italics">Cardona</i></span></a></span> was whether vacation pay should be treated as marital property, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> did not reach the issue Nieto raises here: whether the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_12226"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span> allows forfeiture of earned vacation pay.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="12226" data-sentence-id="12439" class="ldml-sentence">And our resolution of that issue depends, in part, on the conditions that must be met for vacation pay to be covered by the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_12439"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="12226" data-sentence-id="12569" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">We</span> turn now to that question.</span></p></div></div><div class="ldml-section"><section class="ldml-heading content__heading content__heading--depth2" data-ordinal_end="2" data-format="upper_case_letters" data-parsed="true" data-content-heading-label="B. The CWCA Applies to Earned and Determinable Vacation Pay" data-id="heading_12598" data-value="B. The CWCA Applies to Earned and Determinable Vacation Pay" data-specifier="B" id="heading_12598" data-ordinal_start="2"><span data-paragraph-id="12598" class="ldml-paragraph "><b class="ldml-bold"><span data-paragraph-id="12598" data-sentence-id="12598" class="ldml-sentence">B.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="12598" data-sentence-id="12601" class="ldml-sentence">The <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_12601"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span> Applies to Earned and Determinable Vacation Pay</span></b></span></section><p data-paragraph-id="12657" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="12657" data-sentence-id="12657" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_12657"><span class="ldml-cite">¶18 Subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(14)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(III)</span></span></a></span> requires, in relevant part, that an <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"employer shall pay upon separation from employment all vacation pay <i class="ldml-italics">earned</i> and <i class="ldml-italics">determinable</i> in accordance with the <span class="ldml-parenthetical">[employment]</span> agreement."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="12657" data-sentence-id="12862" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-referencenote">Emphases added</span>.)</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="12657" data-sentence-id="12880" class="ldml-sentence">Because neither <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"earned"</span> nor <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"determinable"</span> is defined by the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_12880"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> construe each term according to its common and ordinary meaning.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="12657" data-sentence-id="13016" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">See</span> </i> <i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/886628317" data-vids="886628317" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_12880"><span class="ldml-refname">Mook</span></a></span>,</i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_12880"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 24</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/886628317" data-vids="886628317" class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">457 P.3d at 574</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:seepeoplevvoth,2013co61"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">People v. Voth</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">2013 CO 61</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 23</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:inrethepeopleofthestateofcoloradovvothcaseno13sa113312p3d144october21,2013" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_13104"><span class="ldml-cite">312 P.3d 144, 149</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-quotation quote"><span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">"In determining the plain and ordinary meaning of words, <span class="ldml-entity">courts</span> may look to the dictionary for assistance."</span></span>)</span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="12657" data-sentence-id="13214" class="ldml-sentence">Thus, on its face, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_13214"><span class="ldml-cite">subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(14)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(III)</span></span></a></span> applies to all vacation pay that, upon separation, <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span> is owed <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"as return for ... work done or services rendered"</span> by an employee, Merriam-Webster Dictionary, https://merriamwebster.com/dictionary/earn <span class="ldml-parenthetical">[https://perma.cc/DX4A-8H5Z]</span>; <i class="ldml-italics">accord Earn,</i> Black's Law Dictionary <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">11th ed. 2019</span></a></span>)</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-quotation quote">"To acquire by labor, service, or performance."</span>)</span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">see</span> </i> <i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:inremarriageofcardona,2014co3,316p3d626" data-prop-ids="sentence_13214"><span class="ldml-refname">Cardona</span></a></span>,</i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_13214"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 29</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:316p3d626,628" data-prop-ids="sentence_13214"><span class="ldml-cite">316 P.3d at 634</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span></span> and <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(2)</span> is <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[a]</span>ble to be determined or ascertained"</span> pursuant to the terms of an agreement, <i class="ldml-italics">Determinable</i> , Black's Law Dictionary <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">11th ed. 2019</span></a></span>)</span>; <i class="ldml-italics">accord</i> Merriam-Webster Dictionary, https://merriam-webster.com/dictionary<i class="ldml-italics">/determinable</i> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">[https://perma.cc/4YBM-K8VN]</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-quotation quote">"capable of being determined, definitely ascertained, or decided upon"</span>)</span>.<span class="ldml-pagenumber" data-rep="P.3d" data-id="pagenumber_13964" data-val="1145" data-page_type="bracketed_cite" data-vol="488"></span></span></p><p data-paragraph-id="13964" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="13964" data-sentence-id="13965" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_13965"><span class="ldml-cite">¶19</span></a></span> Both requirements are satisfied here.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="13964" data-sentence-id="14007" class="ldml-sentence">First, any vacation pay Nieto accrued prior to her termination was <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"for work <span class="ldml-parenthetical">[<span class="ldml-entity">she</span>]</span> already performed"</span> and, thus, <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"earned."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="13964" data-sentence-id="14130" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:inremarriageofcardona,2014co3,316p3d626" data-prop-ids="sentence_14007"><span class="ldml-refname">Cardona</span></a></span>,</i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_14007"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 29</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:316p3d626,628"><span class="ldml-cite">316 P.3d at 634</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-referencenote">citation omitted</span>)</span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="13964" data-sentence-id="14181" class="ldml-sentence">Indeed, by the terms of the agreement, Nieto's vacation pay was earned.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="13964" data-sentence-id="14253" class="ldml-sentence">CMI's handbook explains that <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"vacation time is <i class="ldml-italics">earned</i> during the anniversary year previous to the twelve- <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(12)</span> month period it is actually taken."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="13964" data-sentence-id="14400" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-referencenote">Emphasis added</span>.)</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="13964" data-sentence-id="14418" class="ldml-sentence">And the forfeiture clause provides that <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[i]</span>f you are discharged for any reason or do not give proper notice, you will forfeit all <i class="ldml-italics">earned</i> vacation pay benefits."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="13964" data-sentence-id="14580" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-referencenote">Emphasis added</span>.)</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="13964" data-sentence-id="14598" class="ldml-sentence">Second, at the time of her termination, Nieto's earned vacation pay was <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"capable of being determined"</span> under the policy, which specifies the amount earned per year based on an employee's total years at CMI.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="13964" data-sentence-id="14804" class="ldml-sentence">It was therefore <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"determinable."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="13964" data-sentence-id="14837" class="ldml-sentence">As such, her vacation pay appears to be covered by the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_14837"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span> according to the plain language of <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_14837"><span class="ldml-cite">subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(14)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(III)</span></span></a></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="14956" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="14956" data-sentence-id="14956" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_14956"><span class="ldml-cite">¶20</span></a></span> Yet the division below concluded, and CMI argues, that the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_14956"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span> does not apply because Nieto's vacation pay had not <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"vested"</span> under CMI's policy at the time of her termination.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="14956" data-sentence-id="15136" class="ldml-sentence">In reaching this conclusion, the division concluded that <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"vested"</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span> means something other than <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"earned and determinable"</span> and, <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(2)</span> notwithstanding its omission from <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_15136"><span class="ldml-cite">subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(14)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(III)</span></span></a></span>, applies to vacation pay in light of other general <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_15136"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span> provisions that include the term.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="14956" data-sentence-id="15416" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">See</span> </i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_15136"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Nieto</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">¶¶ 8, 11, 17</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-cert">citing</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_15136"><span class="ldml-cite">§§ 8-4-101<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(14)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(I)</span></span></a></span>, - 109<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span> )</span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <span class="ldml-signal"><i class="ldml-italics">see also</i></span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_15516,sentence_15136"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 8-4-101<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(14)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(I)</span></span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">generally defining wages or compensation and providing, in relevant part, that <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[n]</span>o amount is considered to be wages or compensation until such amount is earned, <i class="ldml-italics">vested</i> , and determinable"</span></span>)</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-referencenote">emphasis added</span>)</span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_15742,sentence_15136"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 8-4-109<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span></span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">requiring that <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"wages or compensation for labor or service earned, <i class="ldml-italics">vested,</i> determinable, and unpaid"</span> be paid immediately upon an employee's discharge</span>)</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-referencenote">emphasis added</span>)</span></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="15910" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="15910" data-sentence-id="15911" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_15911"><span class="ldml-cite">¶21</span></a></span> In interpreting <span class="ldml-entity">a statute</span>, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> aim to give effect to every word and presume that <span class="ldml-entity">the legislature</span> did not use language idly.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="15910" data-sentence-id="16038" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:seeyoungvbrightonschdist27j,2014co32" data-prop-ids="sentence_15911"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Young v. Brighton Sch. Dist. 27J</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">2014 CO 32</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_15911"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 25</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/892976449" data-vids="892976449" class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">325 P.3d 571, 579</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="15910" data-sentence-id="16109" class="ldml-sentence">But in this particular context, it is quite possible that <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"vested"</span> is essentially a synonym of <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"earned."</span></span> <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span data-paragraph-id="15910" data-sentence-id="16214" class="ldml-sentence"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">See, e.g.</span>, </i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/893368787" data-vids="893368787" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_16251"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Barnes</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">787 P.2d at 209</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-quotation quote"><span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">"Under the <span class="ldml-parenthetical">[<span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span>]</span>, compensation is <i class="ldml-italics">earned</i> if it is <i class="ldml-italics">vested</i> pursuant to an employment agreement at the time of an employee's termination."</span></span>)</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="15910" data-sentence-id="16389" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-referencenote">emphases added</span>)</span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/895398526" data-vids="895398526" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_16475"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Rohr v. Ted Neiters Motor Co.</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">758 P.2d 186, 188</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-court">Colo. App.</span> <span class="ldml-date">1988</span>)</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-quotation quote"><span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">"Rohr's bonus was <i class="ldml-italics">earned</i> and, therefore, became <i class="ldml-italics">vested</i> and <i class="ldml-italics">determinable</i> as of the date of termination, even though not due and payable for <span class="ldml-parenthetical">[multiple]</span> months thereafter."</span></span>)</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="15910" data-sentence-id="16646" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-referencenote">emphases added</span>)</span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">19 Williston on Contracts § 54:35</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(4th ed.)</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[A]</span>n employee who has performed services required in an employment contract has a <i class="ldml-italics">vested</i> right to the compensation <i class="ldml-italics">earned</i> ...."</span>)</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="15910" data-sentence-id="16839" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-referencenote">emphases added</span>)</span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">see also</span> </i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/890471967" data-vids="890471967" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_16894"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Hartman</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">591 P.2d at 1321</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-quotation quote"><span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">"<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[V]</span>acation pay —like wages —is both vested and determinable as of the date of termination."</span></span>)</span></span></span><span data-paragraph-id="15910" data-sentence-id="16987" class="ldml-sentence">.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="16988" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="16988" data-sentence-id="16989" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_16989"><span class="ldml-cite">¶22</span></a></span> Moreover, even assuming that <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"vested"</span> is distinct from <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"earned,"</span> <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> disagree that it applies to vacation pay.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="16988" data-sentence-id="17103" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">The legislature</span> omitted the term <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"vested"</span> in <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_17103"><span class="ldml-cite">subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(14)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(III)</span></span></a></span>, instead including only <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"earned and determinable."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="16988" data-sentence-id="17223" class="ldml-sentence">The division below disregarded that omission as a <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"questionable drafting choice<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[ ]</span>,"</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Nieto</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">¶ 8 n.2</span></a></span>, but <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> decline to do the same.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="16988" data-sentence-id="17355" class="ldml-sentence">It is <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[j]</span>ust as important as what <span class="ldml-entity">the statute</span> says is what <span class="ldml-entity">the statute</span> does not say."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="16988" data-sentence-id="17442" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/886628317" data-vids="886628317" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_17355"><span class="ldml-refname">Mook</span></a></span>,</i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_17355"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 35</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/886628317" data-vids="886628317" class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">457 P.3d at 576</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-referencenote">alteration in original</span>)</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-referencenote">citation omitted</span>)</span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="16988" data-sentence-id="17515" class="ldml-sentence">Indeed, where a term is used in some, but not all, analogous provisions of <span class="ldml-entity">a statute</span>, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> presume that its omission from certain provisions was intentional.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="16988" data-sentence-id="17671" class="ldml-sentence"><i class="ldml-italics">Well </i><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/887850342" data-vids="887850342" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_17671"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Augmentation Subdistrict v. City of Aurora</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">221 P.3d 399, 419</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-court">Colo.</span> <span class="ldml-date">2009</span>)</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span></span> <i class="ldml-italics">see, e.g., </i> <i class="ldml-italics">Rein,</i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_17671"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 31</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/886015661" data-vids="886015661" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_17671"><span class="ldml-cite">465 P.3d at 561</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-embeddedsentence"><span class="ldml-relatingauthority">rejecting</span> that the word <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"willfully,"</span> which appeared in one subsection of <span class="ldml-entity">a statute</span>, could be imputed to other subsections lacking the term</span>)</span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="16988" data-sentence-id="17935" class="ldml-sentence">This is especially <span class="ldml-entity">the case</span> where, as here, the analogous provisions were simultaneously amended or enacted.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="16988" data-sentence-id="18044" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-signal"><i class="ldml-italics">See</i></span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_18085,sentence_17935"><span class="ldml-cite">2003 Colo. Sess. Laws</span> <span class="ldml-cite">at 1852, 1856</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">creating <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_17935"><span class="ldml-cite">subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(14)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(III)</span></span></a></span> and adding <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"vested"</span> to <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_17935"><span class="ldml-cite">subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(14)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(I)</span> and section 8-4-109<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span></span></a></span></span>)</span></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="18190" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="18190" data-sentence-id="18191" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_18191"><span class="ldml-cite">¶23</span></a></span> Further, when confronted with an irreconcilable conflict between multiple provisions of <span class="ldml-entity">a statute</span>, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> must apply the most specific provision.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="18190" data-sentence-id="18337" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-signal"><i class="ldml-italics">See</i></span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_18191"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 2-4-205, C.R.S.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">2020</span>)</span></a></span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/886628317" data-vids="886628317" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_18191"><span class="ldml-refname">Mook</span></a></span>,</i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_18191"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 75</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/886628317" data-vids="886628317" class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">457 P.3d at 582</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="18190" data-sentence-id="18396" class="ldml-sentence">So to the <span class="ldml-pagenumber" data-rep="P.3d" data-id="pagenumber_18406" data-val="1146" data-page_type="bracketed_cite" data-vol="488"></span> extent it conflicts with the general definition of wages or compensation in <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_18396"><span class="ldml-cite">subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(14)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(I)</span></span></a></span> and the payment provision in <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_18396"><span class="ldml-cite">section 8-4-109<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span></span></a></span> referring to payment of vested wages, the specific vacation pay definition in <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_18396"><span class="ldml-cite">subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(14)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(III)</span></span></a></span> controls.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="18667" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="18667" data-sentence-id="18668" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_18668"><span class="ldml-cite">¶24</span></a></span> For these reasons, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> conclude that even if vested means something other than earned, its exclusion from <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_18668"><span class="ldml-cite">subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(14)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(III)</span></span></a></span> signals that <span class="ldml-entity">the legislature</span> did not intend it to apply in this context.<a href="#note-fr3" class="ldml-noteanchor" id="note-ref-fr3">3</a></span> <span data-paragraph-id="18667" data-sentence-id="18874" class="ldml-sentence">As such, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> reject CMI's argument that Nieto's vacation pay —though earned —had not vested in light of the forfeiture clause and was thus beyond the scope of the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_18874"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span>'s protection.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="18667" data-sentence-id="19055" class="ldml-sentence">Rather, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> conclude that <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_19055"><span class="ldml-cite">subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(14)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(III)</span></span></a></span> requires only that vacation pay be earned and determinable upon separation, and that both conditions were met here.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="18667" data-sentence-id="19220" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">We</span> thus turn to whether CMI's forfeiture clause is permissible under the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_19220"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span>.</span></p></div><div class="ldml-section"><section class="ldml-heading content__heading content__heading--depth2" data-ordinal_end="3" data-format="upper_case_letters" data-parsed="true" data-content-heading-label="C. The CWCA Prohibits Forfeiture of Earned Vacation Pay" data-id="heading_19298" data-value="C. The CWCA Prohibits Forfeiture of Earned Vacation Pay" data-specifier="C" id="heading_19298" data-ordinal_start="3"><span data-paragraph-id="19298" class="ldml-paragraph "><b class="ldml-bold"><span data-paragraph-id="19298" data-sentence-id="19298" class="ldml-sentence">C.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="19298" data-sentence-id="19301" class="ldml-sentence">The <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_19301"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span> Prohibits Forfeiture of Earned Vacation Pay</span></b></span></section><p data-paragraph-id="19353" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="19353" data-sentence-id="19353" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_19353"><span class="ldml-cite">¶25</span></a></span> Having concluded that the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_19353"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span> applies to vacation pay that is earned and determinable, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> now consider whether an employee can validly agree to forfeit such pay upon separation.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="19353" data-sentence-id="19536" class="ldml-sentence">Nieto argues that because <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_19536"><span class="ldml-cite">subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(14)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(III)</span></span></a></span> entitles an employee to receive all vacation pay earned but unpaid at the end of the employment relationship, any term of an agreement purporting to waive or modify that right is void because of <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_19536"><span class="ldml-cite">section 8-4-121</span></a></span>'s provision that <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"any agreement ... by any employee purporting to waive or to modify such employee's rights in violation of <span class="ldml-entity">this article</span> shall be void."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="19353" data-sentence-id="19950" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-signal"><i class="ldml-italics">See also</i></span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_19973,sentence_19536"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 8-4-105<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span></span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-quotation quote"><span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">"No employer shall make a deduction from the wages or compensation of an employee except as follows ...."</span></span>)</span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="19353" data-sentence-id="20081" class="ldml-sentence">CMI counters that because the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_20081"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span> does not require employers to provide vacation pay, it is the employment agreement —not the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_20081"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span> —that determines whether vacation pay must be paid upon separation.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="19353" data-sentence-id="20281" class="ldml-sentence">Additionally, CMI argues that its forfeiture clause is valid because <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_20281"><span class="ldml-cite">subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(14)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(III)</span></span></a></span> merely requires vacation pay to be paid upon separation <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"in accordance with the terms of any agreement between the employer and the employee."</span></span></p><p data-paragraph-id="20516" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="20516" data-sentence-id="20516" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_20516"><span class="ldml-cite">¶26 Subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(14)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(III)</span></span></a></span> is at least somewhat susceptible to each of these interpretations, as forfeiture of vacation pay is not explicitly addressed by it or any other <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_20516"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span> provisions.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="20516" data-sentence-id="20705" class="ldml-sentence">Accordingly, <span class="ldml-entity">the statute</span> is ambiguous in this respect, and <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> turn to other interpretive aids to discern <span class="ldml-entity">the legislature</span>'s intent.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="20516" data-sentence-id="20836" class="ldml-sentence">Such interpretive aids include <span class="ldml-entity">the statute</span>'s purpose, its language and structure, the legislative history, and the administrative interpretation of the agency charged with <span class="ldml-entity">the statute</span>'s enforcement.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="20516" data-sentence-id="21035" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-signal"><i class="ldml-italics">See</i></span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_20836"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 2-4-203</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">see, e.g.</span>, </i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:diehlvweiser,2019co70" data-prop-ids="sentence_20836"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Diehl v. Weiser</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">2019 CO 70</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_20836"><span class="ldml-cite">¶¶ 13</span></a></span></span>, 24, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/890598461" data-vids="890598461" class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">444 P.3d 313, 317, 319</span></a></span>.</span></p><div class="ldml-section"><section class="ldml-heading content__heading content__heading--depth3" data-ordinal_end="1" data-format="number" data-parsed="true" data-content-heading-label="1. Purpose" data-id="heading_21126" data-value="1. Purpose" data-specifier="1" id="heading_21126" data-ordinal_start="1"><span data-paragraph-id="21126" class="ldml-paragraph "><b class="ldml-bold"><span data-paragraph-id="21126" data-sentence-id="21126" class="ldml-sentence">1.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="21126" data-sentence-id="21129" class="ldml-sentence">Purpose</span></b></span></section><p data-paragraph-id="21136" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="21136" data-sentence-id="21137" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_21137"><span class="ldml-cite">¶27</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-entity">We</span> have previously recognized that the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_21137"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span>'s purpose is <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"to protect employees from exploitation, fraud<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[,]</span> and oppression."</span></span> <span class="ldml-pagenumber" data-rep="P.3d" data-id="pagenumber_21265" data-val="1147" data-page_type="bracketed_cite" data-vol="488"></span></p><p data-paragraph-id="21265" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="21265" data-sentence-id="21266" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/895386688" data-vids="895386688" class="ldml-reference"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Leonard</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">63 P.3d at 328</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-cert">quoting</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/887340222" data-vids="887340222" class="ldml-reference"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Jet Courier Serv., Inc. v. Mulei</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">771 P.2d 486, 504</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-court">Colo.</span> <span class="ldml-date">1989</span>)</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(Mullarkey, J., concurring)</span></a></span>)</span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">see, e.g.</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_21419"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 8-4-114<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(2)</span></span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">imposing criminal penalties for an employer or its agent that willfully refuses to pay wages or falsely denies a wage claim <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"with intent to annoy, harass, oppress, hinder, coerce, delay, or defraud"</span> the employee</span>)</span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="21265" data-sentence-id="21633" class="ldml-sentence">As a remedial <span class="ldml-entity">statute</span>, it must <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"be liberally construed to carry out its purpose."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="21265" data-sentence-id="21715" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/893459871" data-vids="893459871" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_21633"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Montemayor v. Jacor Commc'ns, Inc.</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">64 P.3d 916, 923</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-court">Colo. App.</span> <span class="ldml-date">2002</span>)</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">accord</span> </i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/895144407" data-vids="895144407" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_21633"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Hartman v. Cmty. Resp. Ctr., Inc.</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">87 P.3d 202, 207</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-court">Colo. App.</span> <span class="ldml-date">2003</span>)</span></a></span></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="21866" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="21866" data-sentence-id="21866" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_21866"><span class="ldml-cite">¶28</span></a></span> CMI's narrow <span class="ldml-entity">interpretation of <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_21866"><span class="ldml-cite">subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(14)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(III)</span></span></a></span></span> —as regulating only the timing of payment and effective only if an employer agrees to pay unused vacation pay upon separation— is contrary to the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_21866"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span>'s remedial purpose.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="21866" data-sentence-id="22096" class="ldml-sentence">So is the notion that <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"in accordance with the terms of any agreement"</span> was included to permit forfeiture clauses.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="21866" data-sentence-id="22209" class="ldml-sentence">Rejecting a similar argument in the context of bonuses, the <span class="ldml-entity">U.S. District Court for the <span class="ldml-entity">District of Colorado</span></span> explained that <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[a]</span>dopting <span class="ldml-parenthetical">[the employer]</span>'s argument would allow employers to manipulate similar contractual language to avoid paying rightful wages to employees by conveniently terminating them shortly before their payday, contravening the public policy behind the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_22209"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span>."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="21866" data-sentence-id="22591" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/887716721" data-vids="887716721" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_22209"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Hallmon v. Advance Auto Parts, Inc.</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">921 F. Supp. 2d 1110, 1120</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-court">D. Colo.</span> <span class="ldml-date">2013</span>)</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <span class="ldml-signal"><i class="ldml-italics">see</i></span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_22699,sentence_22209"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 8-4-101<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(14)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(II)</span></span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">defining, as wages or compensation, <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[b]</span>onuses or commissions earned for labor or services performed in accordance with ... any agreement"</span></span>)</span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="21866" data-sentence-id="22840" class="ldml-sentence">That rationale applies with equal force here.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="21866" data-sentence-id="22886" class="ldml-sentence">In fact, though Nieto's complaint did not allege a particular reason for her termination, <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> posits that CMI might have terminated her merely to effect a forfeiture of her unused vacation pay, given the large amount <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> had accrued.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="21866" data-sentence-id="23120" class="ldml-sentence">That is precisely the kind of <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"exploitation, fraud<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[,]</span> and oppression"</span> of workers the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_23120"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span> was intended to prevent.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="21866" data-sentence-id="23235" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/895386688" data-vids="895386688" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_23120"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Leonard</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">63 P.3d at 328</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-referencenote">citation omitted</span>)</span></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="23278" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="23278" data-sentence-id="23278" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_23278"><span class="ldml-cite">¶29</span></a></span> Accordingly, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> conclude that the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_23278"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span>'s purpose supports Nieto's <span class="ldml-entity">interpretation of <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_23278"><span class="ldml-cite">subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(14)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(III)</span></span></a></span></span>.</span></p></div><div class="ldml-section"><section class="ldml-heading content__heading content__heading--depth3" data-ordinal_end="2" data-format="number" data-parsed="true" data-content-heading-label="2. Language and Structure" data-id="heading_23390" data-value="2. Language and Structure" data-specifier="2" id="heading_23390" data-ordinal_start="2"><span data-paragraph-id="23390" class="ldml-paragraph "><b class="ldml-bold"><span data-paragraph-id="23390" data-sentence-id="23390" class="ldml-sentence">2.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="23390" data-sentence-id="23393" class="ldml-sentence">Language and Structure</span></b></span></section><p data-paragraph-id="23415" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="23415" data-sentence-id="23415" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_23415"><span class="ldml-cite">¶30 Subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(14)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(III)</span></span></a></span> defines <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"vacation pay"</span> as <span class="ldml-quotation quote">" <span class="ldml-quotation quote">‘wages’</span> or <span class="ldml-quotation quote">‘compensation’</span> "</span> for purposes of the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_23415"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span>, and no other provision specifically refers to <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"vacation pay."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="23415" data-sentence-id="23587" class="ldml-sentence">Instead, the rest of the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_23587"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span> refers generally to <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"wages"</span> or <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"compensation"</span> only.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="23415" data-sentence-id="23669" class="ldml-sentence">This suggests that <span class="ldml-entity">the legislature</span> intended the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_23669"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span>'s general protections of wages and compensation to apply equally to vacation pay, except as provided in <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_23669"><span class="ldml-cite">subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(14)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(III)</span></span></a></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="23850" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="23850" data-sentence-id="23850" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_23850"><span class="ldml-cite">¶31 Subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(14)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(III)</span></span></a></span> includes three relevant distinctions.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="23850" data-sentence-id="23916" class="ldml-sentence">First, unlike minimum hourly wages, an employer is not obligated to provide paid vacation.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="23850" data-sentence-id="24007" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">See</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_24016,sentence_23916"><span class="ldml-cite">id.</span></a></span> </i><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-quotation quote"><span class="ldml-embeddedsentence"><i class="ldml-italics">"If</i> an employer provides paid vacation for an employee ...."</span></span>)</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-referencenote">emphasis added</span>)</span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="23850" data-sentence-id="24096" class="ldml-sentence">Second, as previously noted, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_24096"><span class="ldml-cite">subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(14)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(III)</span></span></a></span> does not include the term <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"vested"</span> in referring to the vacation pay that must be paid upon separation.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="23850" data-sentence-id="24252" class="ldml-sentence">Third, unlike the other provisions that define wages or compensation, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-signal"><i class="ldml-italics">see</i></span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_24252"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 8-4-101<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(14)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(I)</span>-<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(II)</span>, <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(IV)</span>, subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(14)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(III)</span></span></a></span></span> adds a substantive requirement: <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"If an employer provides paid vacation for an employee, the employer shall pay upon separation from employment all vacation pay earned and determinable in accordance with the terms of any agreement between the employer and the employee."</span></span></p><p data-paragraph-id="24651" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="24651" data-sentence-id="24651" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_24651"><span class="ldml-cite">¶32</span></a></span> CMI claims that even where an employer provides paid vacation, <span class="ldml-entity">the statute</span> does not require it to be paid upon separation because that requirement can be overridden by a contractual provision due to the limiting language at the end of the sentence: <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"in accordance with the terms of any agreement between the employer and the employee."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="24651" data-sentence-id="24991" class="ldml-sentence">However, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> conclude that a more plausible understanding of that limitation is that it qualifies <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"earned and determinable"</span> rather than the requirement that an <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"employer shall pay"</span> vacation pay.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="24651" data-sentence-id="25185" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">We</span> reach this conclusion for at least two reasons.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="24651" data-sentence-id="25236" class="ldml-sentence">First, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> have <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"consistently held that the use of the word <span class="ldml-quotation quote">‘shall’</span> in <span class="ldml-entity">a statute</span> is usually deemed to involve a mandatory connotation."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="24651" data-sentence-id="25371" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/891383816" data-vids="891383816" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_25236"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">People v. Dist. Ct.</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">713 P.2d 918, 921</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-court">Colo.</span> <span class="ldml-date">1986</span>)</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">see, e.g.</span>, </i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/891720480" data-vids="891720480" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_25510,sentence_25236"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Colo. State Bd. of Acct. v. Raisch</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">931 P.2d 498, 500</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-court">Colo. App.</span> <span class="ldml-date">1996</span>)</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">declining to infer qualification of or exception to <span class="ldml-entity">statute</span> using the <span class="ldml-pagenumber" data-rep="P.3d" data-id="pagenumber_25580" data-val="1148" data-page_type="bracketed_cite" data-vol="488"></span> word <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"shall"</span></span>)</span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="24651" data-sentence-id="25596" class="ldml-sentence">CMI's interpretation would essentially negate that mandatory connotation here, as well as contravene <span class="ldml-entity">the legislature</span>'s manifest intent to prevent contractual waiver or modification of an employer's mandatory obligations under the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_25596"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="24651" data-sentence-id="25832" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-signal"><i class="ldml-italics">See</i></span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_25596"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 8-4-121</span></a></span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="24651" data-sentence-id="25847" class="ldml-sentence">Second, CMI's interpretation of the statutory language would render the entire provision meaningless.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="24651" data-sentence-id="25949" class="ldml-sentence">If an employer can require its employees to enter agreements forfeiting vacation pay at the end of the employment relationship, then the General Assembly's addition of <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_25949"><span class="ldml-cite">subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(14)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(III)</span></span></a></span>, requiring payment of earned vacation pay, would be completely meaningless.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="26216" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="26216" data-sentence-id="26216" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_26216"><span class="ldml-cite">¶33</span></a></span> For these reasons, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> conclude that the statutory language and structure support Nieto's interpretation.</span></p></div><div class="ldml-section"><section class="ldml-heading content__heading content__heading--depth3" data-ordinal_end="3" data-format="number" data-parsed="true" data-content-heading-label="3. Legislative History" data-id="heading_26324" data-value="3. Legislative History" data-specifier="3" id="heading_26324" data-ordinal_start="3"><span data-paragraph-id="26324" class="ldml-paragraph "><b class="ldml-bold"><span data-paragraph-id="26324" data-sentence-id="26324" class="ldml-sentence">3.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="26324" data-sentence-id="26327" class="ldml-sentence">Legislative History</span></b></span></section><p data-paragraph-id="26346" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="26346" data-sentence-id="26346" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_26346"><span class="ldml-cite">¶34</span></a></span> Nieto argues that committee hearing testimony related to <span class="ldml-entity">the enactment of <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_26346"><span class="ldml-cite">subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(14)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(III)</span></span></a></span></span> further supports her interpretation.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="26346" data-sentence-id="26485" class="ldml-sentence"><i class="ldml-italics">See, e.g.,</i> Hearing on <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">H.B. 1206</span></a></span> before the <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">H. Bus. Comm., 64th Gen. Assemb., 1st Sess.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">Mar. 20, 2003</span>)</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(statements of <span class="ldml-entity">Lorrie Ray</span>, <span class="ldml-entity">Mountain States Employers Council</span>)</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-quotation quote"><span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">"There's nothing in the law that says you have to pay vacation pay, only that if you do offer it and you do have a policy for vacation, then you would have to pay it out as earnings.</span> <span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">And that's what I'm trying to make clear. ...</span> <span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">And then if <span class="ldml-parenthetical">[employers]</span> fail to pay that vacation pay on termination, <span class="ldml-entity">they</span> are in violation of the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_26880"><span class="ldml-cite">Colorado Wage Claim Act</span></a></span>."</span></span>)</span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span></span> Hearing on <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">H.B. 1206</span></a></span> before the <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">S. Bus. Comm., 64th Gen. Assemb., 1st Sess.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">Apr. 23, 2003</span>)</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">statement of <span class="ldml-entity">Heidi Heltzel</span>, <span class="ldml-entity">Colorado Association of Commerce and Industry</span></span>)</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[T]</span>he employee is entitled to any earned vacation time upon termination."</span>)</span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="26346" data-sentence-id="27253" class="ldml-sentence">While this testimony is not dispositive, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> agree that it supports Nieto's interpretation.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="26346" data-sentence-id="27344" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">See</span> </i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/893349671" data-vids="893349671" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_27401,sentence_27253"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">People v. Rockwell</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">125 P.3d 410, 419</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-court">Colo.</span> <span class="ldml-date">2005</span>)</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-embeddedsentence"><span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[T]</span>estimony before a congressional committee helps illustrate the understanding of legislators,"</span> though it is <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"not conclusive proof of <span class="ldml-entity">legislative intent</span>."</span></span>)</span></span></span><span data-paragraph-id="26346" data-sentence-id="27558" class="ldml-sentence">.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="27559" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="27559" data-sentence-id="27559" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_27559"><span class="ldml-cite">¶35</span></a></span> Additionally, Nieto and CMI both highlight that when debating House <span class="ldml-entity">Bill</span> 03-1206, <span class="ldml-entity">the legislature</span> considered—but declined to adopt—an <span class="ldml-entity">amendment</span> explicitly allowing forfeiture of earned vacation pay with sufficient notice to the employee:</span></p><blockquote data-paragraph-id="b_27800" class="ldml-blockquote"><span data-sentence-id="27800" class="ldml-sentence">An employer shall specifically notify an employee of any agreement between the employer and the employee that requires or results in loss or forfeiture of accrued vacation pay.</span> <span data-sentence-id="27977" class="ldml-sentence">An employer who does not provide such notification shall not subject such employee to any loss or forfeiture.</span></blockquote><p data-paragraph-id="28086" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="28086" data-sentence-id="28086" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">H.B. 1206, 64th Gen. Assemb., 1st Sess.</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(preamended)</span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="28086" data-sentence-id="28140" class="ldml-sentence">CMI argues, without specific support, that <span class="ldml-entity">the legislature</span>'s rejection of <span class="ldml-entity">this amendment</span> was intended to unqualifiedly <i class="ldml-italics">allow</i> forfeiture of earned vacation pay — i.e., without requiring an employer to give notice to an employee.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="28086" data-sentence-id="28368" class="ldml-sentence">However, as Nieto points out, the only evidence of a reason for striking this proposed <span class="ldml-entity">amendment</span> was offered at the relevant committee hearing and is quite different from that suggested by CMI:</span></p><blockquote data-paragraph-id="b_28561" class="ldml-blockquote"><span data-sentence-id="28561" class="ldml-sentence">What this does is —there had been language put in here regarding whether employers could forfeit vacation pay, and through our discussions, the language had an unintended consequence.</span> <span data-sentence-id="28745" class="ldml-sentence">So <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> found it easier just to strike it and keep it very clear that the employee is <i class="ldml-italics">entitled to any earned vacation</i> time upon termination.</span></blockquote><p data-paragraph-id="28883" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="28883" data-sentence-id="28883" class="ldml-sentence">Hearing on <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">H.B. 1206</span></a></span> before the <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">S. Bus. Comm., 64th Gen. Assemb., 1st Sess.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">Apr. 23, 2003</span>)</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">statement of <span class="ldml-entity">Heidi Heltzel</span>, <span class="ldml-entity">Colorado Association of Commerce and Industry</span></span>)</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-referencenote">emphasis added</span>)</span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="28883" data-sentence-id="29069" class="ldml-sentence">And though such testimony is in no way <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"conclusive proof"</span> of what was intended, it is nonetheless illustrative of the legislators' understanding of the effect of foregoing <span class="ldml-entity">the amendment</span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="28883" data-sentence-id="29256" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/893349671" data-vids="893349671" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_29069"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Rockwell</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">125 P.3d at 419</span></a></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="29282" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="29282" data-sentence-id="29282" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_29282"><span class="ldml-cite">¶36</span></a></span> Accordingly, to the extent it pertains to this issue, the legislative history supports Nieto's <span class="ldml-entity">interpretation of <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_29282"><span class="ldml-cite">subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(14)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(III)</span></span></a></span></span>.</span></p></div><div class="ldml-section"><section class="ldml-heading content__heading content__heading--depth3" data-ordinal_end="4" data-format="number" data-parsed="true" data-content-heading-label="4. Agency Deference" data-id="heading_29423" data-value="4. Agency Deference" data-specifier="4" id="heading_29423" data-ordinal_start="4"><span data-paragraph-id="29423" class="ldml-paragraph "><b class="ldml-bold"><span data-paragraph-id="29423" data-sentence-id="29423" class="ldml-sentence">4.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="29423" data-sentence-id="29426" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">Agency Deference</span></span></b></span></section><p data-paragraph-id="29442" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="29442" data-sentence-id="29442" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_29442"><span class="ldml-cite">¶37</span></a></span> After <span class="ldml-entity">the court of appeals</span> announced its <span class="ldml-entity">opinion in <span class="ldml-entity">this case</span></span>, the agency tasked with enforcing the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_29442"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span> —the <span class="ldml-entity">Colorado Department of Labor and Employment</span>, <span class="ldml-entity">Division of Labor Standards and Statistics</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-quotation quote">"CDLE"</span>)</span> — promulgated a rule contradicting <span class="ldml-pagenumber" data-rep="P.3d" data-id="pagenumber_29688" data-val="1149" data-page_type="bracketed_cite" data-vol="488"></span> the division's holding.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="29442" data-sentence-id="29713" class="ldml-sentence"><i class="ldml-italics">See</i> <span class="ldml-entity">Dep't of <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_29713"><span class="ldml-cite">Lab. & Emp.</span></a></span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">,</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_29713"><span class="ldml-cite">7 Colo. Code Regs. 1103-7:2, Rule 2.17</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">2019</span>)</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">[hereinafter <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">CDLE Rule 2.17</span></a></span>]</span></span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="29442" data-sentence-id="29815" class="ldml-sentence">Nieto argues that <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> should defer to that rule, citing <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/887779354" data-vids="887779354" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_29815"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">National Cable & Telecommunications Ass'n v. Brand X Internet Services</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">545 U.S. 967</span>, <span class="ldml-cite">125 S.Ct. 2688</span>, <span class="ldml-cite">162 L.Ed.2d 820</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">2005</span>)</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="29442" data-sentence-id="29996" class="ldml-sentence">In <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:brandx,545usat982,125sct2688" data-prop-ids="sentence_29996"><span class="ldml-refname"><i class="ldml-italics">Brand X</i></span></a></span> <i class="ldml-italics">,</i> the <span class="ldml-entity">U.S. Supreme Court</span> held that, under federal law, <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[a]</span> <span class="ldml-entity">court</span>'s prior judicial construction of <span class="ldml-entity">a statute</span> trumps an agency construction otherwise entitled to <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/895215105" data-vids="895215105" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_29996"><span class="ldml-refname"><i class="ldml-italics">Chevron</i></span></a></span> deference only if the prior <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-entity">court</span> decision</span> holds that its construction follows from the unambiguous terms of <span class="ldml-entity">the statute</span> and thus leaves no room for agency discretion."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="29442" data-sentence-id="30345" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:brandx,545usat982,125sct2688" data-prop-ids="sentence_29996"><span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">Id.</i> at 982</span>, <span class="ldml-cite">125 S.Ct. 2688</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="29442" data-sentence-id="30373" class="ldml-sentence">In other words, <span class="ldml-entity">the Court</span> determined that the <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_30373"><span class="ldml-cite">federal Administrative Procedure Act</span></a></span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">,</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/944366724" data-vids="944366724" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_30373"><span class="ldml-cite">5 U.S.C. §§ 551 - 559</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">2018</span>)</span></a></span></span>, permits a federal agency to abrogate <span class="ldml-entity">a court</span>'s prior interpretation of an ambiguous <span class="ldml-entity">statute</span> —i.e., do exactly what the CDLE attempted here.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="29442" data-sentence-id="30627" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">See</span> </i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:brandx,545usat982,125sct2688" data-prop-ids="sentence_30373"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Brand X</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">545 U.S. at 982</span>, <span class="ldml-cite">125 S.Ct. 2688</span></a></span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="29442" data-sentence-id="30674" class="ldml-sentence">However, the CDLE is a <i class="ldml-italics">state</i> agency, and <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-entity">the Court</span>'s holding in <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:brandx,545usat982,125sct2688" data-prop-ids="sentence_30674"><span class="ldml-refname"><i class="ldml-italics">Brand X</i></span></a></span></span> is not binding as to parallel state administrative procedure <span class="ldml-entity">statutes</span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="29442" data-sentence-id="30817" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">We</span> have not yet similarly interpreted the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_30817"><span class="ldml-cite">Colorado Administrative Procedure Act</span></a></span>, and <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> decline Nieto's invitation to do so here.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="30946" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="30946" data-sentence-id="30946" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_30946"><span class="ldml-cite">¶38</span></a></span> Indeed, just as <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> decline to follow <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:brandx,545usat982,125sct2688" data-prop-ids="sentence_30946"><span class="ldml-refname"><i class="ldml-italics">Brand X</i></span></a></span> <i class="ldml-italics">,</i> <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> are unwilling to adopt a rigid approach to agency deference that would <i class="ldml-italics">require</i> <span class="ldml-entity">courts</span> to defer to a reasonable agency interpretation of an ambiguous <span class="ldml-entity">statute</span> even if a better interpretation is available.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="30946" data-sentence-id="31203" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">Cf.</span> </i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/895215105" data-vids="895215105" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_31321,sentence_30946"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, Inc.</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">467 U.S. 837, 844</span>, <span class="ldml-cite">104 S.Ct. 2778</span>, <span class="ldml-cite">81 L.Ed.2d 694</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">1984</span>)</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-embeddedsentence"><span class="ldml-relatingauthority">stating</span> that, under the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_30946"><span class="ldml-cite">federal administrative law</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"a <span class="ldml-entity">court</span> may not substitute its own construction of a statutory provision for a reasonable interpretation made by the administrator of an agency"</span></span>)</span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="30946" data-sentence-id="31521" class="ldml-sentence">True, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> have, at times, appeared to embrace <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/895215105" data-vids="895215105" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_31521"><span class="ldml-refname"><i class="ldml-italics">Chevron</i></span></a></span> <i class="ldml-italics">-style</i> deference for purposes of the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_31521"><span class="ldml-cite">Colorado Administrative Procedure Act</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="30946" data-sentence-id="31650" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">See, e.g.</span>, </i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/890416357" data-vids="890416357" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_31521"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">N. Colo. Med. Ctr., Inc. v. Comm. on Anticompetitive Conduct</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">914 P.2d 902, 907</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-court">Colo.</span> <span class="ldml-date">1996</span>)</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/888293383" data-vids="888293383" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_31521"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Huber v. Kenna</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">205 P.3d 1158, 1164</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-court">Colo.</span> <span class="ldml-date">2009</span>)</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(Martinez, J., concurring)</span></a></span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="30946" data-sentence-id="31834" class="ldml-sentence">But in <span class="ldml-entity">other cases</span>, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> have made clear that, while agency interpretations should be given due consideration, <span class="ldml-entity">they</span> are <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"not binding on <span class="ldml-entity">the court</span>."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="30946" data-sentence-id="31980" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:elpasocountyboardofequalizationvcraddock,850p2d702,704-05colo1993" data-prop-ids="sentence_31834"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">El Paso Cnty. Bd. of Equalization v. Craddock</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">850 P.2d 702, 704-05</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-court">Colo.</span> <span class="ldml-date">1993</span>)</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">see</span> </i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/886825787" data-vids="886825787" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_31834"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">BP Am. Prod. Co. v. Colo. Dep't of Revenue</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">2016 CO 23</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_31834"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 15</span></a></span></span> n.5, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/886825787" data-vids="886825787" class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">369 P.3d 281, 285 n.5</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/888926426" data-vids="888926426" class="ldml-reference"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Ingram v. Cooper</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">698 P.2d 1314, 1316</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-court">Colo.</span> <span class="ldml-date">1985</span>)</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">see also</span> </i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/886790529" data-vids="886790529" class="ldml-reference"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Brunson v. Colo. Cab Co., LLC</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">2018 COA 17</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 12</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/886790529" data-vids="886790529" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_32288"><span class="ldml-cite">433 P.3d 93, 96</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-quotation quote"><span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">"When a promulgating body provides an interpretation contained in other formats, such as opinion letters, internal agency guidelines, manuals or bulletins — all of which lack the force of law — such interpretations are <span class="ldml-quotation quote">‘entitled to respect,’</span> but only to the extent that those interpretations have the <span class="ldml-quotation quote">‘power to persuade.’</span> "</span></span>)</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-referencenote">citation omitted</span>)</span></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="32632" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="32632" data-sentence-id="32632" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_32632"><span class="ldml-cite">¶39</span></a></span> The CDLE <span class="ldml-entity">interpretation of <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_32632"><span class="ldml-cite">subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(14)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(III)</span></span></a></span></span> is in fact consistent with <span class="ldml-entity">the statute</span>'s purpose, language, structure, and legislative history.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="32632" data-sentence-id="32783" class="ldml-sentence">Moreover, as the CDLE noted when adopting <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_32783"><span class="ldml-cite">Rule 2.17</span></a></span>, its hearing officers had interpreted the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_32783"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span> to prohibit forfeiture of vacation pay before the division's opinion below.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="32632" data-sentence-id="32958" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-signal"><i class="ldml-italics">See</i></span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_32978,sentence_32783"><span class="ldml-cite">CDLE Rule 2.17</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">collecting hearing officer decisions</span>)</span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">see, e.g.</span>, </i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:inreenergysmartdoorsys,no18-023,at6cdleapr25,2018" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_33098,sentence_32783"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">In re Energy Smart Door Sys.</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">No. 18-023</span>, <span class="ldml-cite">at 6</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-court">CDLE</span> <span class="ldml-date">Apr. 25, 2018</span>)</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-quotation quote"><span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">"<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[A]</span>n employer can no more require forfeiture of earned vacation wages upon separation than it could require forfeiture of earned hourly wages."</span></span>)</span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:inreexcelmechsys,no17-058,at2-3cdlejuly10,2017" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_33310,sentence_32783"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">In re Excel Mech. Sys.</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">No. 17-058</span>, <span class="ldml-cite">at 2-3</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-court">CDLE</span> <span class="ldml-date">July 10, 2017</span>)</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-quotation quote"><span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">"<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[A]</span> policy cannot deprive an employee of earned vacation time and/or wages that are associated with that earned vacation time."</span></span>)</span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <span class="ldml-signal"><i class="ldml-italics">see also</i></span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_32783"><span class="ldml-refname">Dep't of Lab. & Emp., Div. of Lab. Standards & Stat., <i class="ldml-italics">Wage Protection Act of 2014 Frequently Asked Questions</i></span>, <span class="ldml-cite">at 4-5</span></a></span></span>, https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/sites/default/files/WPA%20FAQs%208-16-16.pdf <span class="ldml-parenthetical">[https://perma.cc/3HN4-R3MK]</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(last updated <span class="ldml-entity">Aug. 2016</span>)</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(nonbinding guidance replaced by <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">Rule 2.17</span></a></span>)</span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="32632" data-sentence-id="33745" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">We</span> therefore consider this agency interpretation further persuasive evidence that Nieto's understanding of <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_33745"><span class="ldml-cite">subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(14)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(III)</span></span></a></span> is the correct one.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="33895" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="33895" data-sentence-id="33896" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_33896"><span class="ldml-cite">¶40</span></a></span> For these reasons, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> conclude that the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_33896"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span> prohibits forfeiture of earned vacation pay.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="33895" data-sentence-id="33990" class="ldml-sentence">Accordingly, if an employer chooses to provide vacation pay, any contract term that purports to forfeit it —like CMI's forfeiture clause here —is void under <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_33990"><span class="ldml-cite">section 8-4-121</span></a></span>.<span class="ldml-pagenumber" data-rep="P.3d" data-id="pagenumber_34163" data-val="1150" data-page_type="bracketed_cite" data-vol="488"></span></span></p></div></div></div><div class="ldml-section"><section class="ldml-heading content__heading content__heading--depth1" data-ordinal_end="3" data-format="upper_case_roman_numeral" data-parsed="true" data-confidences="very_high" data-content-heading-label=" III. Attorneys' Fees" data-id="heading_34163" data-value="III. Attorneys' Fees" data-specifier="III" id="heading_34163" data-types="attorney_fees_costs" data-ordinal_start="3"><span data-paragraph-id="34163" class="ldml-paragraph "> <b class="ldml-bold"><span data-paragraph-id="34163" data-sentence-id="34164" class="ldml-sentence">III.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="34163" data-sentence-id="34169" class="ldml-sentence">Attorneys' Fees</span></b></span></section><p data-paragraph-id="34184" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="34184" data-sentence-id="34184" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_34184"><span class="ldml-cite">¶41</span></a></span> Nieto requests her attorneys' fees incurred in this appeal.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="34184" data-sentence-id="34248" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">We</span> decline to award her attorneys' fees pursuant to <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">C.A.R. 39.1</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="34184" data-sentence-id="34313" class="ldml-sentence">However, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> recognize that Nieto may be able to recover such fees if <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> ultimately prevails in <span class="ldml-entity">the district court</span>, and <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> leave that question for consideration in that forum.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="34184" data-sentence-id="34489" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-signal"><i class="ldml-italics">See</i></span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_34313"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 8-4-110<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span>, C.R.S.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">2020</span>)</span></a></span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:grahamvzurichamericaninsuranceco,2012coa188" data-prop-ids="sentence_34313"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Graham v. Zurich Am. Ins. Co.</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">2012 COA 188</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_34313"><span class="ldml-cite">¶¶ 27-29</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/887447094" data-vids="887447094" class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">296 P.3d 347, 352</span></a></span>.</span></p></div><div class="ldml-section"><section class="ldml-heading content__heading content__heading--depth1" data-ordinal_end="4" data-format="upper_case_roman_numeral" data-parsed="true" data-confidences="very_high" data-content-heading-label="IV. Conclusion" data-id="heading_34595" data-value="IV. Conclusion" data-specifier="IV" id="heading_34595" data-types="conclusion" data-ordinal_start="4"><span data-paragraph-id="34595" class="ldml-paragraph "><b class="ldml-bold"><span data-paragraph-id="34595" data-sentence-id="34595" class="ldml-sentence">IV.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="34595" data-sentence-id="34599" class="ldml-sentence">Conclusion</span></b></span></section><p data-paragraph-id="34609" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="34609" data-sentence-id="34609" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_34609"><span class="ldml-cite">¶42</span></a></span> Although the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_34609"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span> does not create an automatic right to vacation pay, when an employer chooses to provide such pay, it cannot be forfeited once earned by the employee.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="34609" data-sentence-id="34781" class="ldml-sentence">The provisions of CMI's employee handbook purporting to forfeit Nieto's earned but unused vacation pay are therefore void under <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_34781"><span class="ldml-cite">section 8-4-121</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="34609" data-sentence-id="34926" class="ldml-sentence">Because Nieto's complaint thus stated a viable claim for relief and should not have been dismissed, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> reverse the division's judgment and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.</span></p></div></div><div class="ldml-notes content__heading content__heading--depth1" data-content-heading-label="Footnotes"><div class="ldml-note ldml-note"><p data-paragraph-id="35125" class="ldml-paragraph "><sup class="ldml-superscript"></sup><a href="#note-ref-fr1" class="ldml-notemarker" id="note-fr1">1</a> <span data-paragraph-id="35125" data-sentence-id="35126" class="ldml-sentence">In light of these <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"use-it-or-lose-it"</span> provisions, and because Nieto earned only three weeks — presumably 120 hours — of paid vacation at her last accrual under the policy, CMI argues that <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> could not have accrued 136 hours at the time of her termination.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="35125" data-sentence-id="35383" class="ldml-sentence">However, Nieto claims <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> copied that figure directly from her final paystub, which is not in the record before <span class="ldml-entity">us</span>.</span></p></div><div class="ldml-note ldml-note"><p data-paragraph-id="35498" class="ldml-paragraph "><sup class="ldml-superscript"></sup><a href="#note-ref-fr2" class="ldml-notemarker" id="note-fr2">2</a> <span data-paragraph-id="35498" data-sentence-id="35499" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">We</span> granted certiorari to resolve the following issue:</span></p><blockquote data-paragraph-id="b_35552" class="ldml-blockquote"><span data-sentence-id="35552" class="ldml-sentence">Whether <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_35552"><span class="ldml-cite">section 8-4-101<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(14)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(III)</span> of the Colorado Wage Claim Act</span></a></span> allows an employment agreement to forfeit an employee's accrued but unused vacation pay upon separation of employment.</span></blockquote></div><div class="ldml-note ldml-note"><p data-paragraph-id="35737" class="ldml-paragraph "><sup class="ldml-superscript"></sup><a href="#note-ref-fr3" class="ldml-notemarker" id="note-fr3">3</a> <span data-paragraph-id="35737" data-sentence-id="35738" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">We</span> are unpersuaded that <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/893703222" data-vids="893703222" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_35738"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Hernandez v. Ray Domenico Farms, Inc.</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">2018 CO 15</span>, <span class="ldml-cite">414 P.3d 700</span></a></span>, and principles of stare decisis require <span class="ldml-entity">us</span> to conclude otherwise.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="35737" data-sentence-id="35893" class="ldml-sentence">In <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/893703222" data-vids="893703222" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_35893"><span class="ldml-refname"><i class="ldml-italics">Hernandez</i></span></a></span> <i class="ldml-italics">,</i> <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> were asked to resolve whether wages that should have been paid during the employment relationship can be recovered in an action filed after the employee's termination and, if so, when <span class="ldml-entity">the statute</span> of limitations applicable to such a claim begins to run.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="35737" data-sentence-id="36164" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/893703222" data-vids="893703222" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_36164"><span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">Id.</i></span></a></span> at <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_36164"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 1</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/893703222" data-vids="893703222" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_36164"><span class="ldml-cite">414 P.3d at 701</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="35737" data-sentence-id="36193" class="ldml-sentence">In concluding that the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_36193"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span>'s post-termination recovery mechanism applies to all unpaid wages —not just those exempted from <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_36193"><span class="ldml-cite">section 8-4-103</span></a></span>'s requirement of payment in regular intervals —<span class="ldml-entity">we</span> explained:</span></p><blockquote data-paragraph-id="b_36393" class="ldml-blockquote"><span data-sentence-id="36393" class="ldml-sentence">Under the <span class="ldml-parenthetical">[<span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_36393"><span class="ldml-cite">CWCA</span></a></span>]</span>'s plain language, a terminated employee is entitled to receive <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"all amounts for labor or service performed,"</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_36393"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 8-4-101<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(14)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span></span></a></span>, which are <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"earned, <i class="ldml-italics">vested,</i> determinable, and unpaid at the time of discharge,"</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_36393"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 8-4-109<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span></span></a></span>.</span> <span data-sentence-id="36633" class="ldml-sentence">This may include wages of the sort that are due and payable regularly throughout the time of employment and also some types of compensation — <i class="ldml-italics">like vacation pay,</i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_36633"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 8-4-101<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(14)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(III)</span></span></a></span> —that are payable only at separation.</span></blockquote><p data-paragraph-id="36853" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="36853" data-sentence-id="36853" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_36853"><span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">Id.</i></span></a></span> at <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_36853"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 9</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/893703222" data-vids="893703222" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_36853"><span class="ldml-cite">414 P.3d at 703</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-referencenote">emphases added</span>)</span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="36853" data-sentence-id="36899" class="ldml-sentence">Based on this statement, the division below concluded that, in <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/893703222" data-vids="893703222" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_36899"><span class="ldml-refname"><i class="ldml-italics">Hernandez</i></span></a></span> <i class="ldml-italics">,</i> <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"appl<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[ied]</span> this limitation to vacation pay under <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_36899"><span class="ldml-cite">subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(14)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(III)</span></span></a></span>,"</span> <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Nieto</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">¶ 8</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-cert">citing</span> <i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/893703222" data-vids="893703222" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_36899"><span class="ldml-refname">Hernandez</span></a></span>,</i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_36899"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 9</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/893703222" data-vids="893703222" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_36899"><span class="ldml-cite">414 P.3d at 703</span></a></span> )</span></span>, and CMI now argues the same.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="36853" data-sentence-id="37135" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">We</span> disagree.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="36853" data-sentence-id="37148" class="ldml-sentence">Our <span class="ldml-entity">decision in <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/893703222" data-vids="893703222" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_37148"><span class="ldml-refname"><i class="ldml-italics">Hernandez</i></span></a></span></span> had nothing to do with vacation pay or <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_37148"><span class="ldml-cite">subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(14)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(III)</span></span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="36853" data-sentence-id="37238" class="ldml-sentence">It requires a strained reading of both <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/893703222" data-vids="893703222" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_37238"><span class="ldml-refname"><i class="ldml-italics">Hernandez</i></span></a></span> <span class="ldml-referenceseparator">and</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_37238"><span class="ldml-cite">section 8-4-109</span></a></span></span></span> to conclude that either imports a vesting requirement into a statutory provision that explicitly excludes any such requirement.</span></p></div></div></div></div>
 </div> </div>

Case Details

Case Name: Carmen NIETO v. CLARK'S MARKET, INC.

Court Name: Supreme Court of Colorado

Date Published: Jun 14, 2021

Citation: 488 P.3d 1140

Docket Number: Supreme Court Case No. 19SC553

Court Abbreviation: Colo.