LEG500 Assignment 2: Ethics and Corporate Responsibility in the Workplace and the World

As you are aware, the decision by the Court of the Barton v. Rona case (2012 ONSC 3809) recognized that although Mr. Barton’s misconduct was serious, his specific acts of misconduct were not severe enough to warrant his dismissal. The Court felt that in this situation, a stern warning to him never again to permit a safety violation by an employee would have been sufficient (p.13, para. 55). This was particularly the case, based on your investigation you have performed on April 24, 2009, given that nothing in his excellent work record and no prior infractions suggested that he would not be amenable to such discipline (p.10, para. 40) or that he would repeat such misconduct in the future (p.9, para. 38). Given that the Court could not find that his misconduct met the threshold of striking at the heart of the employment relationship (p.14, para. 55), it concluded that Rona had breached Mr. Barton’s employment contract, and Mr. Barton was entitled to damages as a result (p.14, para. 56).

1. Identify and describe the specific issues Maalick encountered in the workplace. Do the actions of other workers at Treton represent discrimination and harassment? What elements of law are important for Treton to consider?

Belton, R. (2004). Employment discrimination law: cases and materials on equality in the workplace. Thomson/West

From this incident was any employee disciplined for not following safety procedures. This would establish if the company believes the employees were negligent in their duty.

In 1980, a precedent was set in a Michigan court case involving a man named Charles Toussaint who was suing his employer, BlueCross Blue Shield, for wrongful termination based on the guidelines set in the employee manual (Alfred and Bertsche 33). The manual stated that employees would only be terminated for just cause, and the court decided that Blue Cross had violated the agreements in the employee manual (34). The court also ruled that even with Blue Cross’s efforts to provide a document that “issued non-binding guidelines” the employee manual was a contract and Toussiant was wrongfully terminated (34). After the precedent set by this case many employers and employees for that matter were reviewing their employee manuals for the type of

In addition, Williams violated 29 C.F.R. § 1926.651(k) (1) for failing to designate a “competent person” with sufficient training and knowledge to identify and correct existing and predictable hazards (www.dol.gov). No supervisor at the Company was familiar with the basic standards applicable to the worksite or otherwise “capable of identifying and correcting existing and predictable hazards in their surroundings.” The court disagreed that the Company discharged its OSHA duties merely by relying on the general work experience of Dzamba and J.P. Williams or “common sense.”

The legal process within the human resources department tries to format strategies and alliances that avoid negative activities affecting the employers and employees; however, exhibitions using common sense or compassion can conflict with these guidelines creating inappropriate behaviors. If this becomes the case, disciplinary actions begin bringing about other matters of legal issues. Nevertheless, once an individual believes they have been illegally mistreated, they become more apt to submit a lawsuit for purposes of revenge, financial struggles, or inapt employment securities (Alboher, 2012).

B. The decision-maker reconciled the legal principles involved by observing that courts has held employers liable for harassment by supervisors especially when the harassment is done by those in charge of hiring, firing, and promoting. The decision was also reach by the decision makers who considered the interactions of past sexual harassment cases, referring to its guidance in Meritor Savings Bank, FSB v. Vinson, 106 S.Ct. 2399

The company offered inconsistent versions of why Mr. Gill was terminated and who did the termination. They were indifferent to Mr. Gill’s concerns and did nothing to address those employees engaging in blatant racial harassment even after other black employees complained and, most damaging, the company retaliated against Mr. Gill when he complained by terminating his

The Hartford NLRB office filed a complaint of unlawful dismissal of Mrs. Dawnmarie stating that the party was involved in protected concerted activity on Facebook at the time when she criticized her senior. In addition, NLRB identified several unlawful provisions within the company’s manual of conduct. However, before hearing, the company opted for an out of court settlement with Mrs. Dawnmarie besides revising their unlawful provisions in their handbook.

The HR System says, Stephon Williamson Vol. quit to avoid Term for Safety violation, do you have documentation that will give insight as to what happened and any other signed documentation (by Stephon) that will help substantiate our case? I need all of the documentation no later than Monday 23, 2016 noon.

I would ask that Dynamic Duo conduct the informal conference with the local OSHA office and then follow through with a contest proceeding if the informal conference proves unsuccessful. It is imperative to inform Dynamic Duo that during the informal conference, it is very important that the employer displays support for the company and carefully listen to all the allegations presented. Therefore, OSHA Area Directors may decide to provide the photos and facts they claim support the citation during this meeting. It is advisable to make detailed notes of all the evidence OSHA presents. Additionally, it is vital the employer remember that despite the informal setting, he or she is voluntarily attending a legally binding interview with government inspectors. This is not the time to make any acknowledgements, concede on any points, or acknowledge the company has violated any rules or

This case study analyzes the experiences of Courtland Kelley at General Motors (GM). Courtland Kelley a third generation GM worker put his job on the line by pushing the GM managers and executives to fully respond to the safety issues found while working as a safety inspector at the company. Kelley along with his supervisor Bill McAleer first discovered the issues while auditing GM cars at rail yards across the country, a spot check of vehicles before the cars were cleared to be delivered to the dealers. McAleer was taken off the audit as a result, who subsequently sued the company seeking whistle-blower protection. The case was eventually dismissed by a judge in favor of GM. The judgement only increased Kelley’s

Over the past couple of decades, a sudden change has started to take over the way business is done. The time when no rules applied, and anyone could do what they pleased at the cost of others or the environment is rapidly ending. Instead, companies today have become aware that it is essential for them to employ ethics and morality in their actions, if not they will be heavily scrutinized and rejected by the public. This way of thinking also applies to the pharmaceutical industry, which over the past century has been rapidly expanding. Do to the fact that this industry can determine the health and lives of millions of people, it is imperative that this industry follow an ethical and moral path.

This case study was a powerful example to illustrate the presence of ethics within the