One member proposes letting someone sit in on their meetings and offering fundraising advice without the ability to vote. That, however, is still a decision that would be made without all members of the organization. New board member Anna Fixx can see both sides of the argument. If they wait until fall to consult with the members, they would have to wait another year before hiring a fundraiser and could potentially miss out on money. On the other hand, the organization is run by democracy, and not allowing members to vote would be against their values.
Team members received emails from Hugh McBride requesting to list his board of directors’ choice. The team members encouraged to develop “flowery” presentations for approval from Beltway Investments. Because the board of directors operates independently, the CEO has recommended items that would be considered as a conflict of interest and unethical. Team members Betty B. and Betty W. have been awarded the opportunity to be a whistle blower and not become part of the negative behavior. Each of the two should address the wrongs that have been asked of them.
Unquestionably, the decision to change the schedule of production staff was made by managers and directors with no direct knowledge of, and perhaps without consideration of, any employee’s religious affiliation or needs. Based on Walker Toy Company’s policies and procedures to comply with EEOC guidelines, a reasonable person may also agree that management felt this was not an important consideration, as they could have easily made accommodations in line with Title VII if Mrs. Miller had made her needs known. The reasonable person test is pervasive in case law as a factor in determining whether the employee’s resignation was reasonable. The case of Barrow v. New Orleans Steamship Ass’n (1994), established that certain factors are significant in determining constructive discharge: “(1) demotion; (2) reduction in salary; (3) reduction in job responsibilities; (4) reassignment to menial or degrading work; (5) reassignment to work under a younger supervisor; (6) badgering, harassment, or humiliation by the employer calculated to encourage the employee's resignation; or (7) offers of early retirement on terms that would make the employee worse off, whether accepted or not." This case supports my recommendation to litigate because Mrs. Miller was not subjected to any of these tactics, nor does she make any claims that any of these tactics were used toward her.
Before 2002, this was never done and that is what lead to a lot of these big corporations downfall. After SOX became in affect, it made it almost impossible for officers of these major corporations to “play stupid”. They require, not the company but the law now requires the officers not to just believe that someone else has completed the financial records, but they have to know for sure that everything has been done correctly, they have to sign off on all of the financial paperwork. The law also mandates that any stock holders in the corporation have rights to have the auditors come in and conduct there own financial statements and conduct audits as well. The SOX act is governed by eleven titles that make up the rules and guidelines and some are considered to be more important than the other.
Evidence showed that she had several promotions while being employed and that her job performance were averages. The court did not hold the Paper Magic Group liable because the plaintiff could not provide adequate evidence of age discrimination. A case similar to ours, Goldmeier v. Allstate refers to constructive discharge regarding religious beliefs. The plaintiffs claim that Allstate violated their religious beliefs after the company announced that offices would remain open Friday evening and Saturday mornings (Goldmeier, 2003). Evidence showed that Allstate offered the plaintiff’s time to observe their holy day but they would have to work another day.
Case Management Methods Jodi Thomas Rasmussen College Author Note This paper is being submitted on January 17, 2013, for Jodi Thomas’s Case Management course. Case Management Methods Managed Care Model: Is a program where everything is managed. Case management is at risk for all long term care services that are provided under the “managed care model”, whether directly or not, because the HMO profit counts on keeping costs at a low level. It’s obvious that this method is not a choice of method to be used for my client and her children. It’s a method that keeps all costs down, they are on a budget and it’s not a method that will help the entire family, of which they need.
From the very beginning this manager stated clearly what her expectations were from all associates. This manager also expressed that she wanted the members of the team to operate in a different way from any other management. Because of this, she was able to force this change, new structure, on us and she was unable to obtain any trust from any of us regarding her new plan. Trust is an expectation that most followers feel about the intentions and behaviors of their leaders. One of the most effective processes in leadership is the ability to build trust.
Koss Corporation Case Q1. From the Koss Corporation case, we can see that there are many aspects are not functioned properly in the accounting and internal control systems of Koss Corporation. First, the CEO’s supervision and regulation is weak, which means Michael has not fulfilled his responsibility of internal control. Sue initiate and authorize wire transfers of Koss Corp. funds to Sue’s personal creditors for over $16.3 million without requiring or obtaining Michael’s approval. And because Michael trusted Sue, Michael did not fully review the financials before approving them.
To begin with, it defeats the whole point of having democratically elected officials. They are mandated with the responsibility of making decisions on behalf of the citizens. Having referendums undermines this role making them powerless, almost useless. Another disadvantage of holding referendums is the extensive period of time it takes. Referendums cannot be used to make a decision of immediate necessity as it takes weeks and sometimes months to come up with a final decision.
The more than 30-year search for a relationship between corporate social performance (CSP) and corporate financial performance (CFP) has not brought much consistent proof of any clear motive for corporations to get involved in CSR. This could have fed the hope for society that companies really were willing to do well for society. According to Margolis and Walsh (2001), the lack of clear proof is due to a nonexisting theoretical foundation of the empirically revealed relations between CSP and CFP. The questionable quality of the performed research was also mentioned by Margolis and Walsh. They reviewed all kinds of possible studies on relationships between CSP and CFP.