Chestnut contended that Mr. Reeves was terminated for inaccurate record keeping. Actions taken against Mr. Reeves were not in compliance with the federal employment laws: prima facie case of discrimination, sufficient evidence for the trier of fact to disbelieve the respondent’s nondiscriminatory explanation and the respondent’s explanation for his decision was pre-textual. Mr. Reeves was able to prove that the stated reasons was not the real reason for his discharge and age discrimination was the real reason for termination. REEVES v. SANDERSON A prima-facie case is a lawsuit that alleges facts adequate to prove the underlying conduct supporting the cause of action and thereby prevail. Sanderson stated that their reason for terminating Mr. Reeves was due to inaccurate record keeping.
She cited Ford as authority to bring an action against her employer. The Court of Appeals rejected her claim, stating that there was no evidence that the employer was even aware of the co-worker’s misconduct until she quit. Furthermore, the conduct was described as an “unexpected injury-causing event” within the coverage of the workers’ compensation statute. This case suggests a possible trend toward erosion of the exclusivity ban of workers’ compensation when it comes to workplace violence. If an employer is presumably “on notice” that an employee displays episodes of violence and does nothing, or very little, for a protracted period of time and the employee ultimately engages in a violent act resulting in physical harm and emotional distress, can the injured worker bring a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress against the employer?
Defects in marketing have to do with the improper instructions and failures to warn consumer of latent dangers in the product. Product liability is usually judged as a strict liability offense. Strict liability wrongs are not concerned with how careful the defendant was. Converted to products liability terms, a defendant is liable when it is revealed that the product is defective. It is immaterial the
In order for a defendant to be liable, the plaintiff must establish both negligence and proximate cause. (Aaron Larson, Law Offices of Aaron Larson, October, 2003). Esposito was injured due to Davis knocking into her when he turned around. The negligent conduct was Davis turning around without warning. The owner of the craft show could be liable for the accident of his employee under Vicarious Liability.
(Cornock, 2010) With this is mind, does Herman have an employer’s duty of care in regards to Jake's injury and his overtime? 1. Explain whether Jake’s actions are in or out of “his scope of employment. Jakes actions are within the scope of his employment as manager servicing. Being a manager, Jake is responsible for the end to end and orderly running of his department, including meeting the outputs expected and he cannot take shelter under ‘being overworked’.
Introduction For decades, the Hawthorne effect has been used to explain how group behaviour was more important than any other external factors in altering the outcome of the performance or behaviour of people. Proponents of the Hawthorne effect say this behavioural change is not due to any specific condition being tested, but that people behave and perform differently when they are in a group (Robbins, Bergman, Stagg, & Coulter, 2012, p.474). Bramel and Friend (1981) argued that this assumption is flawed, because the Hawthorne experiments presented a view of the workers being tested as “irrational and unintelligent, and of the capitalist factory as nonexploitative and free of class conflict” ( p.867). Did the Hawthorne effect really happened exactly as Mayo and Roethlisberger presented, or did the two researchers deliberately left out crucial points in their findings so as to suit their pre-determined objectives which were in line with management’s at that time? That is the main contention in Bramel and Friend’s (1981) critique of the Hawthorne effect in “Hawthorne, the Myth of the Docile Worker, and Class Bias in Psychology.” Porter (2012), in his analysis of the Hawthorne effect, concluded that “ultimately, the Hawthorne effect is about group norms” (p.15).
Unlike the past, the days of an employee staying with a company for a long term are a thing of the past. But, some companies still believe that tenure is directly related to performance. Confusing loyalty with tenure can severely hurt a corporation. Some companies still rate tenure higher than performance, which can cause a lack of cohesiveness in the organization. Tenure is not synonyms with loyalty, and often just represents compliance and survival (Myatt, 2011).
To ensure the quality of the products being produced at Lincoln, employees were only compensated on products that were not defective and employees had to repair the products on their own time in order to receive payment for them (p.132). The piecework payment system was a process that was received favorably by employees and gave employees the impression that they were their own boss and had complete control over their job. Year end bonuses, another process of Lincoln’s incentive system, relates directly to the piecework payment system. The total year end bonuses were determined by the performance of the company and these bonuses were generally increased as a result of lower production costs. On average, the bonuses
For example the human resources, if an employee has to be fired it is better to say it to him then by a phone call or an e-mail. By verbal information it is easier to convey all your messages about the verb. In a big company like Heineken, is it not always possible to meet in person. You have to find a other way to communicate, like a phone call, Skype or WhatsApp, but it is important always to use a combination of methods. Written: Written information is very useful when you have to reach several persons but you don’t have time for a meeting or conversation.
Their negligence and careless washing method caused the explosion. 2- The principles of corporate socially responsibility that are applicable to the actions of the parties in question are: * Corporations have a duty to correct adverse social impacts they cause. For example, after the accident, Union Carbide should have been willing to compensate the citizens and cleaned the mess they cause. * Social responsibility varies with company’s characteristics: in this case, the industry, location and the internal culture play a big part in the accident. * Also the theory of moral unity is applicable: where business actions should be judged by the general ethical standard of society, not by a special set of permissive standards.