Our relationship is and will be always one of voluntary employment “at will” (Halbert, 2012, pp. 50-51). I would then have the HR representative show her in the handbook where we, as her employer, reserve the right to terminate any employee due to tardiness; furthermore, the HR representative will explain to her that though she thinks being terminated from our company is “unfair”, that in a court of law it will not be deemed as “wrongful termination” unless our termination of her employment is unlawful. Since Tennessee is an “employment-at-will” state, she has no valid “wrongful termination” claim. Additionally, we will explain that her discharge is not in retaliation for her refusal to violate public policy or for reporting such; Finally, we will explain that
Negotiation is a two way street in order to reach an agreement that both sides are comfortable with and both agree to maintain for a number of years. In bargaining there are two types that will make or break a union and a company if negotiation is not communicated properly, distributive and integrative. Distributive bargaining is in short a lose-lose method, this is a method that no one is listening to anyone and there no resolution to needs and the proposed solutions. But on the other hand there is integrative, integrative is a win-win for everyone. This is the method where issues are resolved and plans are made to make things
RE: Mr. John Doe’s Willful Termination on December 12, 2011 Executive Summary Based on the facts of the case, I believe we are not liable in the discrimination suit brought by Mr. Doe. Constructive Discharge Constructive discharge is defined as “if an employer's discriminatory acts result in working conditions so intolerable that a reasonable person in the employee's position would feel compelled to resign.” (Finnegan, 1986) Courts generally follow one of two “litmus” tests to determine if a person who willfully terminated their employment was constructively discharged and should receive compensation as a result of the termination. In the majority view, “an employee who resigns after being subjected to unlawful discrimination is said to have been constructively discharged if a reasonable person would have found the discriminatory conditions to be intolerable.” (Finnegan, 1986) The minority view is that the complainant “must show not only that conditions were intolerable, but also that the employer created those conditions with the specific intent of forcing them to resign.” (Finnegan, 1986) Mr. Doe is a member if the production staff. The company changed the production staff’s working hours to a rolling 12 hour shift four days a week that could occur on any day of the week. If the company’s intent was to get Mr. Doe or anyone on production staff to resign by changing the production staff’s hours, it is possible that the actions of the company could be considered a constructive discharge.
Western Governors University LIT1: Task 310.1.5-02, 11, 13 Situation A: The FMLA (Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993) allows for eligible employees of covered employers to take an unpaid, job-protected leave and allow for continuation of their group health insurance coverage. This job-protected leave is provided so that employees can tend to the needs of immediate family. Covered employers are those employers that have 50 or more employees working for them. In this case, Company X would be a covered employer. Eligible employees are those employees that have worked for the company for 12 months or longer and have also worked at least 1,250 hours during that 12 month period of employment.
Assignment 1: Employment –At – Will Doctrine 1 According to the Employment – At – Will Doctrine rule, it is legal for a company to dismiss an employee without a cause; which means a hiring manager can legally let an employee go for just cause reasons. However, there are some exceptions to the rule, a company cannot dismiss employment based on race, gender, color, or religion, employees cannot be fired for reporting violations of workplace safety nor can an employer fire an employee for exercising the right to file a workman’s compensation or a sexual harassment claim. Bases on the given scenario, I think the company should exercise their legal rights and dismiss the employment of Jennifer, the employee. After the company has given this employee an extensive amount of training, to prepare her for the employment duties, for which she was hired; Jennifer is still unable to perform her job duties. Even though, there is an Employment – At – Will law in place, this company does not have to utilize it for this scenario, since the employee cannot perform the duties to which she was hired to do, especially after the company has taken time and money to train her and to equip her which knowledge and skills to perform the required job duties.
What Title VII more specifically states is that discrimination based on religion or taking action against an employee who does not comply with a job requirement that conflicts with the his/her religious beliefs is also prohibited. A charge of constructive discharge is made when an employee is terminated, or feels he/she has no other option but to quit because it has become unbearable to continue working at their jobs based on some form of discrimination or harassment. Typically people that quit their jobs do not receive unemployment benefits, they can however make a claim of constructive discharge in an attempt to receive financial compensation. As you know Tinker toys has acquired the patent for super widget the toy that is revolutionizing the toy industry and started production here in October. With the increase in demand to not only the Chicago area but worldwide we have made the decision to adjust our production schedule to require all employees in the warehouse to work rotating 12 hour shifts for four days straight and then four days off.
Title VII prohibits employers from discriminating against employees of job applicants on the basis of race, color, or national origin. (The Legal Environment of Business, Page 494, 4th Paragraph Right Hand Column) Contract Enforceability contains a valid contract with the elements necessary to entitle at least one of the parties to enforce it in court. (Legal Environment of Business, Page 189, 2nd Paragraph Left Column) Denny’s of Hysteria Denny’s LLC, the manager did respond to his employee in a discriminating response, violating the Title VII, however Denny’s Inc. has no relationship with Hysteria Denny’s LLC except a written agreement about 1) Usage of “Denny’s” name in Hysteria 2) Denny’s Inc. staying away from Hysteria 3) Hysteria Denny’s licensing fee for usage of trademark 4) Advertising and product enforcement and 5) any contract dispute be determined according to Hysteria law. In which this case the “Contract Enforceability” applies to this issue, the companies clearly have no relationship in employment terms or managing except what was mention above. Polly Plaintiff has no case against Denny’s Inc., since there is no other relationship between Hysteria Denny’s LLC and Denny’s Inc., except the contract in regards the trademark usage, advertisement, and product control.
The Supreme Court ruled that such standards, even though applied equally to all employees, were discriminatory because (1) they had an adverse impact on a protected class (African Americans) and (2) Duke Power was unable to show that the standards were related to subsequent job performance. (Gomez-Mejia, L., Balkin, D., Cardy, R., 2010) The reason that this case and the scenario at the toy company are related is due to the fact that the change in the shift change policy standards do not apply, nor are they related to subsequent job performance. Although the employee voluntarily resigned after the policy change, the
As an example, a signed two-year contract that states an employee can be fired during the contract only for committing a crime, then the employee is not an at-will employee. If the employee is fired for any reason not specified in the contract, the employee will have a legal claim against the employer for breach of contract. Aside from a written contract, the only way an employer can not fire an employee at will is if there were verbal exchanges stating “as long as you do a good job, you’ll have a job” or “we will only fire those unable to meet our standards”, and the employee is able to prove those statements were made. Just about every employer is subject to federal and state laws prohibiting job discrimination, therefore an employee cannot be fired because of race, religion, or gender, discrimination or harassment. An employee also can not be fired “at will” for taking family and medical leave, serving in the military, voting, or jury duty.
“Title VII prohibits the employer from using a facially neutral employment practice that has an unjustified adverse impact on members of a protected class” (HR Guide to the Internet, n.d.). Disparate treatment discrimination makes sure no direct discrimination occurs to people apart of a protected class. “Disparate Treatment Title VII prohibits employers from treating applicants or employees differently because of their membership in a protected class” (HR Guide to the Internet). Companies are normally very sensitive not to discriminate against employees knowingly or unknowingly. Recently in New Haven Connecticut 77 fire fighters of various ethnic backgrounds: Caucasians, African Americans and Hispanics took a promotion test to become eligible for the position of captain.