After calling the GM at home and explained the issue I was having he blamed me for ordering the wrong item. I was forced to continue braking down the product and sent the crew home when it was finished followed by canceling Sunday shift. Monday rolls around and I reorder the correct product and they rush the order to be delivered Tuesday 8:00 am. The GM approaches me late Monday morning to explain that he told me the incorrect item number according to his notes taken at the time of the meeting with the GM and the customer. He went on to discuss how he should have had me present in the meeting to go over important details to make the project on budget.
I (Pat) then called a meeting to announce that the plant you be moving to a 10 hour a day 4 day work week and that all overtime would now need to be preapproved by Paul. As a result the employees slow down work in order get opportunities for overtime. Paul, noticing this, stopped giving out overtime all together. This caused even more resentment toward management by employees. Paul then posted strict guidelines for what is expected from employees and what punishment they may receive for not adhering to his new rules.
She is now scared that the factory may explode at any moment. Your Assignment You are an employee at this factory. You have worked there for over 10 years and know everyone from the owner to the co-workers. This situation has you nervous as well, but you don’t know what to do because you do not want to get anyone in trouble. You decide to speak with several people at the factory.
On August 18, 2004, the plaintiff moved to strike the defendant's answer based upon the defendant's failure to produce a representative. The defendant countered this claim by arguing that it made meticulous efforts to reaching Monforte by sending him letters to appear and to contact the company. In a final letter it even stated that if he failed to be in contact he would then be issued a subpoena. It was not until after this claim that the court was then informed that Montforte was no longer an employee of Robin’s Wood, Inc. Monforte was in fact subpoenaed to appear and did not, the following month, the Supreme Court granted the motion to strike the defendant's answer. This in evidently meant that the plaintiff would be granted a default judgment and would be granted what they were asking.
The branch manager instructed Anderson to investigate the matter. Anderson subsequently approached the suspect, who promised to track down and deposit the missing deposits and discuss the missing deposits and go over the books over the weekend. However, Tonya Larsen remained in her office with the door shut the remainder of the day and stayed behind after everyone else had left. The next morning, Anderson arrived to see that Larsen had shredded paper, changed passwords and had gone through patient files. The following Monday, Anderson received a message from Larsen’s lawyer letting her know any questions directed to Larsen would have to go through him.
Many of the workers had delayed their vacations at the request of the company due to the busy season of the window industry. This accounted for as much as $150,000 in vacation pay (Lydersen, 58). The company told the employees that the shutdown
MEMO To: Mr. Leighton Smith CEO From: Jesika Wirefly, Elementary Division Manager CC: Human Resources, Production Department Date: October 25, 2014 Re: Constructive Discharge I am writing this memo as a result of the recent event where a former employee has resigned once a new schedule change was put into effect. This is commonly referred to as constructive discharge. This employee has alleged that our factory is being discriminatory against his religious holy day due to the required 12 hour schedule that has been implemented. Originally the staff was required to work 8 hour shifts from Monday to Friday. The schedule has now been modified to a rotating 12 hour shift that runs from Monday to Sunday to accommodate our increasing
Concord Bookshop Paper Monica Wilson HCS/587 January 14, 2013 Dr. Sonnia Oliva Concord Bookshop Paper I would like to present the caase of a Concord area bookshop where organizational change goes wrong on many levels for a number of the stakeholders; i.e., store employees and some members of management. Spector (2010) points out that the board of the 64 year old institution decided to hire a new general manager, in effect causing de facto demotions. The workers wanted to meet with the owners to discuss the issues but the owners declined. They opted instead to move forward with their planned change, minus any employee input. The proposed change caused a number of employees to resign and many in the community to voice their outrage.
Where are the papers at that I told you to do about our financial issues? You looking dumb saying to yourself, I should have paid attention at the meeting yesterday. Now I am at risk of losing my job all because I did not pay attention in the meeting. The funny part is your boss fires you because you did not pay attention in the meeting. That day when the women came to speak, and class was over, I put myself in her shoes see what she went thru; it is hard to try to talk over like 30 kids in one room.
According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructive_discharge, In employment law, constructive dismissal, also called constructive discharge, occurs when employees resign because their employer's behavior has become so intolerable or heinous or made life so difficult that the employee has no choice but to resign. Since the resignation was not truly voluntary, it is in effect a termination. Recently we made a change to the schedule the employees were working because of the growth of the company. Our plant workers are now required to work four days and have 4 days off, these will be 12 hours and can fall on any day of the week. This is a requirement for every employee working in the plant.