Most importantly, during the September 2003 negotiations, the union failed to achieve having the Company remove the anti-nepotism policy or at a minimum allow for some exclusions concerning the policy. For example, employees who have contributed successfully to the company regardless of having relatives as employees should be exempt from being terminated. Second, the company’s nepotism policy had been enforced for many years and had the policy incorporated in the employee handbook since June 2003 and is quoted in the CBA. Also recorded in the Company’s argument is “…it has enforced the no-relative rule….with the less senior employee always being terminated where two relatives have been found to be working for the Company)”. Mr. Walton is the junior employee and is the person that was terminated.
Case 10-3 Restructuring Costs According to IAS 37, on December 27, 2008 Pharma Co. will recognize the provision for liability of $2 million dollars for the restructuring costs. On this date the plan for restructuring is communicated to employees and it meets the requirements of Paragraph 14 of IAS 37 to recognize the provision. Also, the lease termination fee of $1.3 million dollars is a provision that needs to be recognized on December 15, 2008. Paragraph 5(c) and 14 specifies the requirements to recognize the operational lease that has become onerous as a provision. This contract has become onerous on December 15 because In the Press Release Pharma Co. presents a good estimate of the cost that exceeds the benefit of the contract.
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.
However, this situation would make the company incur more loss next year, which is about negative $ 293,586. In the mean time, Barb Shepard, the company’s owner, wants to sell the company soon, and she knows a purchase price would be determined by three main factors: the absolute level of profits, the rate of growth in profits, and future potential growth in the market. Barb Shepard also wants to reduce bank debts as soon as possible. Therefore, the company needs new strategic initiatives very much to improve operating profitability and move forward next year. Each of three vice presidents has rendered a separate and distinct strategic initiative, and they are “Introduce a new product”, “Increase promotion”, and “Raise prices and cut costs” respectively.
Memo To: From: Date: Subject: The CEO Brenda Peeler, Elementary Division Manager August 23, 2012 Pending Constructive Discharge Litigation from a Former Employee In response to your request, please allow this memorandum to provide you with my findings and recommendations regarding the above-referenced matter. Overview: The case brought by our former employee alleges that the new policy regarding our production staff is in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Additionally, the lawsuit asserts that constructive discharge is the basis of our former employee’s voluntary resignation. However, in order to make such a claim, the courts require evidence of either an aggravated situation beyond ordinary discrimination and/or an
(TCO B) On its December 31, Year 2, balance sheet, Shin Co. had income taxes payable of $13,000 and a current deferred tax asset of $20,000 before determining the need for a valuation account. Shin had reported a current deferred tax asset of $15,000 at December 31, Year 1. No estimated tax payments were made during Year 2. At December 31, Year 2, Shin determined that it was more likely than not that 10% of the deferred tax asset would not be realized. In its Year 2 income statement, what amount should Shin report as total income tax expense?
Unfortunately in this case the customer Data Equipment Systems is unable to receive shipment until January 11, 2011 due to a lack of available warehouse space (Mintz & Morris, 2011). Reed needs to have that revenue recorded on the 2010 end-of-year financial report. Potential legal and ethical issues Reed is considering booking the $1.2 million sale in the December 2010 books and on December 30 approaches controller Marty Fuller to discuss the dilemma. Fuller explains the accounting rules about sales held for future delivery, although Reed understands the rules he
Harvard Pilgrim Health Care discontinued coverage to Tufts-NEMC in 1995, citing high cost and it almost killed the place (Swayne, et al, 2009). Tufts-NEMC needed a partner to help them with their financial troubles, someone with clout against the health plan. In 1997, Tufts-NEMC and Lifespan officially announced the merger, which became effective in November of that year. The hoped for synergies between the two companies never
It can't be an agreement with the whole workforce. You shouldn't be sacked or unfairly treated (for example refused promotion) for refusing to sign an opt-out. You can cancel your opt-out agreement whenever you want - even if it is part of your employment contract. However, you must give your employer at least seven days notice. This could be longer (up to three months) if you previously agreed this in writing with your employer.
They stated that lower costs, and a world-class seaport as the reasons for the move. This emphasizes the company’s desires to reduce shipping costs and lower costs. In addition, there has been some conflict in regards to unionization. Since Washington State is a unionized State, while South Carolina is a right to work state, Boeing’s president was stated in a recorded interview saying "The overriding factor was not the business climate and it was not the wages we're paying people today. It was that we can't afford to have a work stoppage every three years."