Multiple Oshistle Glowing Case Study

In this case with Williams Construction the company was put under investigation after a trench collapse, which resulted in the death of one employee Jose Aguiniga and a serious injury to another employee Adam Palomar. After the investigation, OSHA charged Williams Construction

In every setting there should be a policy and procedures on whistle blowing. The whistle blowing Policy is put into place to provide protection against the person in the work place against victimisation or any form of punishment (physical or verbal) when concerns are genuine. If you suffer any victimisation or punishment due to whistleblowing you may be able to take your case to an Employment Tribunal. If you have any concerns about misconduct or malpractice that is occurring in your work setting you should report it to your manager/supervisor. All information given is confidential. The whistleblower is a person that discloses wrongdoing that threatens others, rather than a complaint about their own treatment.

This case was based on facts and opinions from Peter Ramirez as being an employee for Yosemite Water Company as a route sales representative/relief sales representative. This case was filed because Mr. Ramirez felt that he wasn’t getting paid properly for all the jobs and duties he performed at the company. Also, the case was to resolve whether a bottled water driver was entitled to overtime pay or whether he was outside salesperson and being exempt from the Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Orders. Mr. Ramirez left the company and then he brought action against Yosemite for unpaid overtime wages. Yosemite defense was that Mr. Ramirez was an outside salesperson and exempt from wage and overtime laws. The best way to avoid costly lawsuits is with careful review of employee classifications (Hsiao-Ying and Kleiner, 2005).

In this instance, Griffith would not be sheltered from retaliation under the traditional state and federal whistleblower laws. Federal laws generally protect those that disclose fraud against the government and state law NY Code 740 covers private sector and only when the complaint has been brought to the supervisor first. In the complaint against the State of New York et al the District Court ruled that Griffith’s first amendment rights and first amendment retaliation claims would not be summarily dismissed.

The employee should first refer to their Code of Ethics to determine if the issue is unethical or just not to their liking. An issue could be ethical and reasonable but just not to their liking. If the issue is reasonable, they should decide if it is worth finding another job, discussing the issue internally, or ignoring. If the issue is unethical, the employee should try to handle the situation within the organization first, such as speaking with their supervisor. If this does not help, the employee should document evidence that can be discussed with an IE board or reasonable observer. Employees can also provide an anonymous complaint to the EPA or file a complaint with OSHA. If done, the employee should have good reason to believe that their complaint could prevent harm and

• MACROBUTTON HTMLDirect [pic]An implied promise • MACROBUTTON HTMLDirect [pic]Employment at will • MACROBUTTON HTMLDirect [pic]Due process • MACROBUTTON HTMLDirect [pic]Fiduciary duty of loyalty Correct 6 A worker being fired for actions ranging from filing a workers’ compensation claim to reporting safety violations to government agencies is called

Vencill Management Consulting’s management team is responsible for maintaining an ethical climate by: Explaining to their employees why it's important to comply with the Code of Conduct. Encouraging discussion of the Code and situations. Responding promptly and properly to concerns raised by employees. Protecting employees against reprisals when they report, in good faith, actions they feel violate the law or these standards.

Problem Statement Worksheet - Lowe's Companies, Inc. Sharon Manago CSU Global Strategy Planning MGT 510 Dr. Janice Spangenburg October 2, 2012 Problem Statement Worksheet - Lowe's Companies, Inc. Introduction | In 2008, Lowe’s Companies, Inc. have failed to ensure a sustainable safety environment, put in place a health program, and maintain adequate record keeping on work-related injury and illnesses claims for certain locations in the state of Ohio. This employer has been made aware of OSHA requirements for its industry and has been cited many times for similar infractions. OSHA regulators have imposed stiff penalty fines that have cost Lowe’s Companies Inc. thousands of dollars. The record-keeping violations at the

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

If this type of harassment was something that the employers could have Give both parties a chance to tell their side of the story. It is important in the investigation process that it is free of bias. Also the employer wants avoid retaliation or any adverse action against the employee that filed the complaint (Bethel University, 2016). After the investigation is complete the employer will still need to closely monitor their efforts to remedy harassment (Walsh, 2013).

Ethics Assignment 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

Devon, I agree with you about fighting a wrongful termination battle.  I, personally, would never take to social media to voice my opinion about a specific incident that has stemmed from my job.  That being said, I don't necessarily think it is as serious of an issue as one might think.  You made a great point about working for the government and losing protection from the very law that was designed to protect you.  I never thought about it until you brought it to my attention.  Me and you could have said the same thing about our job but the repercussions could be completely different if one of us worked for a government agency.  Very interesting fact.

Jackson and Raftos (1997) referred to whistle blowing as an avenue of last resort. Employees find themselves in these situations when the authorities at their organisations have failed to take actions on reported issues affecting that organisation. Wimot (2000) likened whistleblowing to a spectrum. At one end of this spectrum whistleblowing would only cause minimal pain and scars on the stakeholders and organisation while on the other end is the worst scenario where the whistleblowing effects are turbulent and often experienced to be negative to all those involved (ibid).

• Employee protections allowing those corporate fraud whistleblowers who file complaints with OSHA within 90 days to win reinstatement, back pay and benefits, compensatory damages, abatement orders, and reasonable attorney fees and costs.

In another employment at will case, fourteen employees from a Florida law firm were fired for wearing orange. The employees were told that management had taken the color of their shirts to mean, “that they were staging some sort of protest.” However, many of the group says that they wear orange shirts on paydays to “promote a feeling of togetherness when they would go out as a group for drinks” . An executive brought the orange wearing employees into a conference room and told “anyone wearing orange for an innocent reason should speak up”, an employee immediately explained the happy hour color. After this, the executive left the room to confer with other executives. When they returned, it was stated that all people wearing orange were fired although someone had said they were wearing the color for innocent reasons . Additionally, if the employees truly had been protesting by wearing the color orange, it would have been illegal to fire them for protesting . The employees reported feeling as though their rights had been infringed upon after being fired for wearing the color orange. These employees were fired without any warning, without being asked to even change