context: Faber avers -- and Menard does not dispute -- that he was plainly told that he was in no position to bargain: he could either sign the contract as it stood, or be replaced by a younger employee who would cost Menard less, with the added stinger that he was told that Menard would not, or that Larry Menard could not, negotiate terms of individual contracts. Moreover, Me-nard is a large national company, and Fa-ber was but one employee of that company, and even if he was a "managerial" employee, he was in the relatively low position of store manager for a multi-store, multi-state chain, so that Faber was not only at a distinct disadvantage in bargaining power, but was also subject to very different financial pressures than Menard.
citation_a.signal: see also
citation_a.identifier: 279 F.3d 893, 893
citation_a.parenthetical: noting that the employment agreement for all new employees with a national chain store was "a prerequisite for employment" that the applicants were not permitted to modify
citation_a.sentence: See Gentile, 479 N.W.2d at 609 (considering whether the parties were under any particular financial pressures); see also Circuit City, 279 F.3d at 893 (noting that the employment agreement for all new employees with a national chain store was “a prerequisite for employment” that the applicants were not permitted to modify)
citation_b.signal: see
citation_b.identifier: 479 N.W.2d 609, 609
citation_b.parenthetical: considering whether the parties were under any particular financial pressures
citation_b.sentence: See Gentile, 479 N.W.2d at 609 (considering whether the parties were under any particular financial pressures); see also Circuit City, 279 F.3d at 893 (noting that the employment agreement for all new employees with a national chain store was “a prerequisite for employment” that the applicants were not permitted to modify)