Moreover, Horatio has no evidence that the HR department treated him in a negative manner and he will not win. If Horatio stays, with the company, the other employees will be overworked therefore, there is no time to train a person with no knowledge or education in HR. Horatio has the burden to prove that in the Title VII complaint, prima facie case of racial discrimination was the reason for
The legal issue in this case are that he was denied a job because he had a hearing impairment which is a disability and they didn't hire him. As a resource manager of a large company like this, I would be very ashamed to say that I work for them and would feel really bad that the company acted like this and
9. The Wall Street Journal did not publish the evidence by Markopolos because then people would take it out on them because they did not do the investigation and its because of them they lost there money. 10. I feel that the SEC did not do their job because they should have at least see these transactions and they should have caught him before everyone lost their money. Just because Madoff had good connections with the SEC they still have done some sort of an investigation and at least say they did not see anything than just ignore it because now people are mad at the
By not mentioning other companies that use the same tactics, he puts a negative image on Nike alone instead of all American companies who choose to outsource manufacturing to foreign countries. I think it’s kind of ironic that Mr. Ballinger is doing research on ethical practices of American companies when he himself is using an unethical approach to his research. Another fact that he fails to mention is that what Nike is doing is not illegal. Unethical, yes, but due to weak policies in some of these foreign companies, it allows for American, or any other nation’s companies, to exploit these practices. Also, why doesn’t he mention anything about the retailers who sell Nike shoes?
Based on the legal encounter, it seems as if the unsatisfactory performance/corrective action plan was not followed in this case. Pat was not put on a corrective action plan and he was not explained what things were not working out. We are unaware of his job performance since he was not put on a corrective action plan and it seems as if his job performance was not mentioned during his termination meeting with his supervisor. Due to Pat being an at-will employee, he can be terminated at any time for any legal reason. If NewCorp is stating that his job performance was unsatisfactory, it must be documented.
c) I don’t believe my organization complies with all of the requirements because I don’t work so this does not apply. d) No one is responsible in my organization to make sure these compliance laws are met because once again I do not work so this does not apply. Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA): a) It is important because it protects kids from pedophiles. b) It impacts your IT environment from possible charges in the case of a child being
The changes they made didn’t affect the business of their place of employment. They refused to change their appearance back to “normal” in order to keep their jobs. They both filed for unemployment compensation and were denied based on being terminated for misconduct. The difference between the two cases is that Apocada dyed her hair and Attired had a visible tattoo. Application to Client’s Facts: The facts in both cases could not be proven that personal appearance affected the sales of the business.
Suppose that Cornelius believes that Elliot is not a good hire for Pharma. Can he fire Elliot? Although Adams may have had the legal right to hire Elliot without the consent of the others, it was a morally wrong decision not to seek the consent of the other shareholding partners. As a privately held corporation which is small in size, the promotion of business efficiency is an objective best served by enabling the owners to arrange the organization of the enterprise as they choose unless such decisions are outside the scope of the partnership business which would make it impossible to
Chrstopherson, (2007) proclaims the company failed at its attempt to place stores in Germany because Wal-Mart failed to adapt to the strategies and regulations of the German government. The United States business plan the company was using in other locations was not congruent with the laws, regulations, and society of Germany (Christopherson, 2007). Organizations such as Wal-Mart have to be mindful of the many hardships imposed by the political and legal systems of government in countries abroad suggest Daniels, Radenbaugh, & Sullivan, (2011). It is believed that most overseas countries do not ascertain the same political, economic, and cultural beliefs as Americans (Daniels, Radenbaugh, & Sullivan, 2011) and for this Wal-Mart would face similar problems when trying to start markets in both China and South Korea. While diversity is built in the Wal-Mart culture of business the locals of South Korea did not agree with the taste or style of western merchandise proclaims David Schwartz, Chief Executive Officer of Productive Environment Inc., (2004).
The interoperability was never put into place for reasons that can only be speculated on. There are assumptions that Grant Holcomb the architect of the proposed system had a conflict of interest that may have profited him. There are also allegations that Greg Meffert, Nagin's chief technology officer, stated that the technology wouldn't work. Many controversial issues of being unethical by several parties involved in this system caused a delay that unfortunately wasn’t in play for Katrina. Interoperability is dangerous to the concept of Federalism because although New Orleans was granted money to fund the system by the national government, at the state level, it was never implemented.