Medical Fraud Essay

732 Words3 Pages
1. Do you feel the alternatives suggested by the court of appeals were viable for TWA? Why or why not? If not, what would you recommend? The alternatives suggested by the court of appeals I felt were very fair and viable. “Alternatively, the Court of Appeals suggested that TWA could have replaced Hardison on his Saturday shift with other available employees through the payment of premium wages. Both of these alternatives would involve costs to TWA, either in the form of lost efficiency in other jobs or higher wages”. When acknowledging someone religious beliefs the appropriate steps could have been taking pulling another employee from an area that is not so busy, or having someone come in to pick up the shift an pay that employee the overtime should have been done. It is a very viable suggestion from the court of appeals. The Court of Appeals also suggested that TWA could have permitted Hardison to work a four-day week if necessary in order to avoid working on his Sabbath. Recognizing that this might have left TWA short-handed on the one shift each week that Hardison did not work, the court still concluded that TWA would suffer no undue hardship if it were required to replace Hardison either with supervisory personnel or with qualified personnel from other departments. I also feel as though it was laziness coming from the supervisory and management team. When your head of a team i.e. manager and or supervisor you are supposed to step in as head of the team to make sure that everything stays afloat. 2. Does it seem inconsistent to prohibit religious discrimination yet say that collective bargaining agreements cannot be violated to accommodate religious differences? Explain. Yes, it is very inconsistent to prohibit religious discrimination yet say that the CBA cannot be violated to accommodate religious beliefs. I don’t feel as though the CBA should even be
Open Document