.png)
You're about to sign a severance agreement, and like most Utah employees, you're focused on the dollar amount. That's understandable. But buried in the legal language is a provision that could expose you to liability for years after you've moved on: the release of claims.
Here's what most people miss: standard severance agreements require you to release all legal claims against your employer while your employer releases nothing. This one-sided arrangement creates asymmetric legal exposure that can come back to haunt you long after you've cashed that severance check and started your next chapter.
A mutual release severance agreement—where both parties waive claims against each other—provides protection that one-sided releases simply don't offer. Understanding this distinction could save you from significant legal vulnerability down the road.
Let's be clear about what's actually happening when you sign a severance agreement: you're entering a transaction. Your employer isn't giving you money out of generosity. They're purchasing something valuable from you—the waiver of your legal rights.
The release of claims is the core of this exchange. When you sign, you're typically waiving your right to pursue employment discrimination claims, wage and hour disputes, wrongful termination allegations, and often "any and all claims, known or unknown" arising from your employment. That language is intentionally broad.
Why do employers want this? Risk mitigation. Even when a termination is completely lawful, defending against an EEOC charge or employment lawsuit costs tens of thousands—and sometimes hundreds of thousands—of dollars. The release provides finality and insurance against future litigation. From the employer's perspective, it's a sound business decision.
The question is whether you're getting adequate protection in return.
A one-sided release means exactly what it sounds like: you waive all claims against your employer, but they waive nothing against you. You're bound; they're free.
This creates real exposure. Your former employer retains the right to sue you for breach of confidentiality provisions in the agreement, alleged violations of non-compete or non-solicitation clauses, contribution or indemnification in third-party lawsuits, claims that you damaged company property or reputation, or allegations of misconduct they "discover" after your departure.
Consider a scenario we see regularly: A customer files a lawsuit against your former employer for something that happened while you worked there. The company decides to bring you into that litigation, seeking contribution or indemnification. With a one-sided release, you've already waived any counterclaims or defenses you might have had against your former employer. You're exposed with limited recourse.
Or imagine this: Six months after your departure, your former employer claims they've discovered you violated confidentiality provisions. Maybe a competitor hired you and they're looking for leverage. With a mutual release, you'd have protection. With a one-sided release, you're defending yourself without the ability to assert claims of your own.
While any employee can face consequences from a one-sided release, certain professionals face heightened risk.
Healthcare providers, attorneys, financial advisors, engineers, architects, and other professionals with malpractice exposure need mutual releases because third-party claims can emerge years after the underlying events. If a patient, client, or customer sues, your former employer may seek to shift responsibility to you. Sales professionals with significant client relationships face similar risks—employers may later allege you improperly solicited clients or shared confidential information, even when your conduct was entirely proper.
Executives and managers involved in company decisions should be particularly cautious. The higher your position, the more likely you'll be named in future litigation involving decisions made during your tenure. Anyone departing amid ongoing projects, disputes, or investigations also faces elevated risk, as does anyone in a regulated industry where compliance issues can surface long after employment ends.
A mutual release creates reciprocal protection. Both you and your employer waive claims against each other arising from your employment relationship. The agreement closes the chapter completely for both parties.
With a mutual release, you're protected from future claims arising from your employment, contribution demands in third-party litigation, and allegations that surface after you've moved on. You gain the peace of mind that comes from knowing the relationship is truly concluded.
We recently represented a Utah physician whose employer was terminating his position due to financial difficulties. The initial severance agreement contained a standard one-sided release. Through negotiation, we secured a mutual release that protected him from potential malpractice contribution claims—protection that proved far more valuable than any additional severance pay we might have negotiated.
When you request a mutual release, employers often push back. "This is our standard agreement," they'll say. Or: "We need to preserve our rights." Some claim they've never had issues with former employees.
These objections don't hold water. If you're releasing claims, reciprocity is fair. If they're terminating you without cause, you have leverage to request balanced terms. And if they've never had issues with former employees, then a mutual release costs them nothing—they're simply declining to preserve rights they claim they'd never exercise anyway.
The key is framing your request professionally. You're not being adversarial; you're asking for a transaction that protects both parties equally. Employers are more likely to agree when the termination is no-fault, when you're represented by counsel, and when you frame the request as seeking closure rather than creating conflict.
The release of claims isn't the only provision that often favors employers exclusively. Look carefully at non-disparagement clauses. One-sided non-disparagement means you can't speak negatively about the company, but they can say whatever they want about you to future employers, industry contacts, or anyone else. Mutual non-disparagement protects your professional reputation.
Confidentiality provisions deserve the same scrutiny. If you're required to keep the severance terms confidential, your employer should face the same restriction. Otherwise, they can disclose terms to others in your industry while you're bound to silence.
The pattern is consistent: standard severance agreements often protect employer interests exclusively. Recognizing this pattern is the first step toward negotiating balanced terms.
Certain release language should trigger immediate caution. Watch for overly broad releases covering "any and all claims, known or unknown, past, present, or future." While some breadth is standard, releases that extend beyond employment-related claims or that release claims against unnamed third parties (parent companies, affiliates, individuals) may be overreaching.
Indemnification clauses deserve particular attention. These provisions can create new obligations rather than simply releasing existing claims. You could find yourself required to defend or compensate your former employer for matters arising after your departure.
Also watch for releases that conflict with other provisions in your employment agreement or the severance document itself. Inconsistent language creates ambiguity that can get resolved against the employee when disputes arise.
The bottom line: don't sign until you understand exactly what you're giving up and what protection you're receiving in return.
Utah's at-will employment framework means your employer has no legal obligation to offer severance at all. This creates the impression that employees have no leverage. But the absence of a legal requirement doesn't mean you lack negotiating power.
Utah courts interpret release language according to established contract principles. Ambiguous provisions are generally construed against the drafter—typically the employer. But relying on court interpretation means you're already in litigation, which is exactly what you're trying to avoid.
Working with an attorney familiar with Utah employment law ensures your agreement provides the protection you need under Utah's legal framework. Different states treat non-competes, releases, and severance provisions differently, and what works elsewhere may not provide adequate protection here.
When you're represented by an employment attorney, several things shift in your favor. Your attorney identifies risks you might miss—provisions that seem standard but create significant exposure. Professional negotiation removes the emotional friction that can complicate direct discussions with your former employer.
Perhaps most importantly, your employer's perception changes when you have counsel. Having legal representation signals that you're taking the process seriously and understand your rights. Employers respond differently to requests from attorneys than to requests from departing employees, even when those requests are identical.
Our experience representing Utah employees shows that legal protections like mutual releases, mutual non-disparagement, and narrowed restrictive covenants are achievable in the vast majority of cases. These protections often prove more valuable than additional severance pay—they provide security that no dollar amount can replace.
Severance is a two-way transaction that should protect both parties. When you sign a one-sided release, you're accepting all the risk while your employer retains all the options. The cost of this imbalance isn't apparent until something goes wrong—a lawsuit emerges, an allegation surfaces, or a former employer decides to exercise rights you didn't know they preserved.
Mutual releases are negotiable, especially when you're being terminated without cause. Your employer is asking you to trust them by releasing your claims. It's entirely reasonable to ask for the same trust in return.
If you're facing a severance decision in Utah, take time to review the release language carefully. Understand what you're waiving and what protection you're receiving. Consider whether legal review would help you identify risks and negotiate balanced terms.
At Crook Legal Group, we help Utah employees secure severance agreements that protect both their financial interests and their legal security. Contact us today for a confidential case evaluation. Let's review your agreement and ensure you're not leaving yourself vulnerable for years to come.
.avif)