Vicarious liability can only be imposed if it is proved that the employee was acting “in the course of employment.” This criteria is essential, and requires a clear connection between the employment duties and the employee’s acts complained of. As such, most employer’s will be insured in order to avoid such liability. In addition, in order to establish vicarious liability, it is necessary to show that an employee was employed under a contract of service, or in the case of an independent contractor, a contract for services. English law has also established that an employer can be held vicariously liable for a breach of statutory duty by
If Newcorp can produce the Corrective Action Plan, the company will have the supported evidence to terminate Ms. Grey base on unsatisfactory performance. In the employee manual signed by Ms. Grey at the start of employment, the company states “If the job performance of an employee is unsatisfactory, the employee will be notified of the deficiency and placed on a Corrective Action Plan (CAP). If the employee performance does not improve to a satisfactory level within the specified period of time, termination will follow.” Ms. Grey will not have a case. If Newcorp cannot produce the Corrective Action Plan, Ms. Grey will have a case. The court will most likely upheld the employee manual for terminating employees for unsatisfactory performance.
“Formal power can come from the ability to coerce or reward or it can come from formal authority, “(Robbins & Judge, 2009, p. 452). Coercive, legitimate, and reward power are bases of power that fall under formal power. A good example of formal coercive power is a when a subordinate only does what is asked for fear of losing his or her job. This type of power is coercive because the “person reacts to this power out of fear of the negative results that might occur if she failed to comply,” (Robbins & Judge, 2009, p. 452). When a group is complying with leaders’ demands from a place of fear it can lead to animosity and a communication breakdown in the group that can follow through with results unwanted by the leader such as employee job strikes.
I have one assignment in Professional Ethics as typed in the next paragraph. To answer the question, I applied the normative theories of ethics to the situation. The question is: Often the life of a whistleblower involves tremendous ridicule and scrutiny from others, despite doing the "right thing." Describe your views as to why whistleblowers face tremendous obstacles as a result of bringing the inappropriate actions of others to light and describe the personal characteristics a person should possess to be an effective whistleblower. My answer: In an attempt to describe why whistleblowers face tremendous obstacles despite acting to what they believed was right, I will try to explain by using some of the Normative Theories of Ethics, for example: a.
Making sure that all involved in this wrongdoing are reprimanded for their actions and noting that to investors and the public. This will take some time and not happen overnight, but to make things right, to the public and investors is well worth a shot.
Since the company excludes liability for manufacturer defects to the product and prejudiced to consumer rights to refund or even replace the product whereupon, If a consumer believes that this term of the contract being an unfair term he can complain to the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) or to one of several consumer-related organizations that can act against unfair consumer contracts. Such a complaint may lead to court action. As an analysis for the reasonableness in the light of UCTA 1977, the company has to meet the following requirements: The contract / notice must not include terms which to exclude or restrict liability for breach of contract, providing an inadequate service, or providing goods that have been misdescribed, are not of satisfactory quality or are not fit for their purpose. This is the case unless such a term is reasonable, although exceptions exist, for example when
Once it has been determined that a duty existed, then it is determined whether or not the duty was breached. A duty has been breached when a defendant knowingly exposed another to possible injury. Even if the defendant did not realize he was exposing another to injury, he should recognize the probability that any other reasonable person would have recognized; therefore, also being a breach of duty (Shestokas, 2009). After establishing a duty existed and there was a breach of that duty, the plaintiff must show that there was a loss or injury to recover. This requirement is important if a defendant is unable to deny his negligence, but the plaintiff suffered no apparent injuries as a consequence.
What should the court decide? Why? > Background check is very important before hiring an employee because it presents the potential liability of employers for the harmful acts of the people they hire. Employers are generally responsible for the actions of their agents so they should avoid negligent hiring. If an employer fails to meet its duty to conduct an adequate background check and hires an unfit employee who uses his or her position to inflict harm on others, that employer may be liable for negligent hiring.
The contracted agency is chosen because of their knowledge and expertise on a particular matter. If principal-agent theory is used to help the principal, why is it labeled “principal-agent problem”? Certain issues that may arise are inflating costs or trying to fix problems that they are not qualified to handle. With the agent having more knowledge than the principal, the principal is trusting that the agent has honest intentions and will complete the task successfully, without causing more issues. The presentation, Whistleblower Fired for Exposing Truth/Corrupt Government Contractor, followed a former director of American Eagle, John Jack.
English law has also established that an employer is also vicariously liable for breach of statutory duty by an employee. In order to establish vicarious liability, it is necessary to show that an employee was employed under contract of service or in the case of an independent contractor a contract for services. EMPLOYEE Can be described as an individual undertaking to do work for another under contract of service CONTRACT OF SERVICE In order to establish a contract of service several traits are put in consideration, these are: Control test This is said to be where the employer has decided how the work should be carried out i.e. the actual method stipulated, rather than simply telling the employee what has to be done. Economic reality test If the person who committed the harmful act doesn’t assume any economic incentive or economic risk in committing the act then the individual is deemed an employee.