A. Constructive Discharge The United States Department of Labor defines constructive discharge as “a worker’s resignation or retirement may be found not to be voluntary because the employer has created a hostile or intolerable work environment or has applied other forms of pressure or coercion which forced the employee to quit or resign” (elaws - WARN Advisor ). For Mr. Scott to claim constructive discharge, he would have to show that the company intentionally created the change in shift with the specific intent of causing him to resign his position. In addition, if the company was aware of the impact of Mr. Scott religious beliefs, in regards to working on specific holy days, and did not consider alternatives or accommodation for those days. B.
B. The employee is claiming constructive discharge because she feels that her rights were violated based on Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which states: ”The law makes it illegal to discriminate against someone on the bases of race, color, religion, national origin or sex. This law also requires that employers reasonably accommodate applicants’ and employees’ sincerely held religious practices, unless doing so would impose an undue hardship on the operation of the employer’s
To: Chief Executive Officer From: Bruno Mars, Elementary Division Manager As you are aware we have had a claim filed against our company under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Our former employee is stating that our new work schedules of four days on and four days off is discriminatory because it requires employees to work on religious holy days and therefore is constructive discharge. I want to first discuss what constructive discharge actually is and why it is relevant to this situation. Constructive discharge occurs when an employer’s actions make the workplace so unacceptable that any reasonable employee would have found it necessary to quit if they were facing the same scenario. The Civil Rights Act of 1964
Pat also questions the reason behind the discharge due to a position he had at a local school board meeting that was contrary to other employees of NewCorp. The liabilities and rights both would assume are NewCorp would assume no liability, but have the right to discharge Pat at-will, NewCorp could face a possible wrongful discharge suit, and a possible illegal discrimination case. Since Pat believes, based on the company’s provision, that the provision limits NewCorp ‘s freedom to discharge him at-will and that he was discriminated against, Pat’s liability and rights is in possibly pushing the issues in court. Whether or not any of the liabilities or rights presented are valid or not, depends on the laws surrounding these issues. When Pat was hired he signed a document stating that he understood the company’s stance as an at-will employer, therefore, since no contract stating the duration of employment, aNewCorp could terminate Pat for any reason except for an illegal one (Cheeseman, 2010).
MEMORANDUM Date: 11/20/2013 Subject: Claim against company under Title VII To: CEO From: At the beginning of the year our company changed its policy for production staff. They are required to work four days on and four days off. This is a required rotating shift. Due to recent policy changes in staffing a claim of constructive discharge has been filed against the company under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The former employee believes that the change in policy has forced him to quit because he has to work on a religious holy day.
To: Chief Executive Officer SUBJECT: Constructive Discharge Claim Per your request, I have completed an initial research on the former employee claim for constructive discharge against our Company under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. He bases his suit on religious discrimination due to the new production schedule that took effect the beginning of the year. In his opinion, the new production schedule requires employees to work on holy days thereby, discriminating against employees whose religious practice does not allow them to work on these particular days. The employee alleges that enforcement of the new policy forced him to resign his position before the effective date of the new schedule. Religious discrimination involves
The form of criticism that applies is sociology because of how the congregation pressured Hughes. Hughes’ aunt spoke of the revival at her church, stating how it would “bring the young lambs to the fold” (Hughes 69). Many people went to the altar at the front to be saved, save Hughes and Westley, who eventually got up because he was tired of sitting in the mourners’ bench. Never seeing Jesus arrive at the church like Hughes anticipated, he eventually got up and the congregation celebrated his decision to be saved. Hughes regretted his decision, but he did not want to keep everyone else waiting.
In fact attentiveness appeals for reconciliation. As Martin Luther King made an explanation that “Past promises have been broken by the politicians and merchants of Birmingham and now is the time to fulfil the natural right of all people to be treated equal” (Rottenberg, Winchell). Martin Luther King’s response to the clergymen’s declaration is that violating the law is wrong method to approach the consequences of what African American’s considering for. He does not think that they have disrupted the law. As he defines the answer to the clergymen’s is that a law was unethical so does not considers as a law, because the law is made to guard the citizens not to penalize them.
Singer admits that there may be a “psychological difference” among the conflicting cases, but he also believes that it provides no excuse to a human’s moral obligation. To explain, just because a person feels ok about not taking action because other people choose to not take action, does not mean that they are morally justified. In his first counterexample, Singer is out to prove that whether there are many people involved in the situation, or one person, it makes no difference. With the idea “global village” and the technology of today’s society, Singer dismisses the idea of distance being a factor. He claims that “instant communication and swift transportation” have made relief organizations so efficient, and that helping them has become as efficient as helping a neighbor.
The employees who tried to bring these practices to light where quickly terminated or pressured into cooperation. Had a large number of christian employees been present in these internal control departments, the whistle would have been blown sooner and more often. Christian ethics are based on faith, they do not allow for wiggle room and cannot be influence by the pressures of corporate culture. Management promoted the manipulation of their earnings, in order to make their stock look more attractive to investors, which ultimately helped Fannie Mae reach their corporate goals. A false balance is an abomination to the Lord, but a just weight is His delight.