Off-the-Job Behavior

First issue that Jim and his executive assistant had to deal with is firing one of his employee named Henry Jaques for “having problems interacting with his co-workers.” Henry was fired by his store manager because they stated that Henry Jaques was “he made the whole place poisonous.” Furthermore, Henry was also complaining about working conditions and was “irate” wanting to sue the company. They reason why Jim is involved in this because he has approved of Henry dismissal. In the article “8 Fedreal Laws that Protect Employees” by Daniel Kurt under the “Employment-Based Discrimination” stated that “It illegal for businesses to discriminate based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.” In this case, Henry was discriminated because

The United States Supreme Court, as well as federal district and state courts, defines employee rights and an employer’s liability for employment law violations. Treatment on the job, including hiring, firing, and promotions, must be based on qualifications and merit and not on race, gender, age, sexual preference or how one responds to sexual advances. Yet despite these laws and policies, many employees continue to suffer from workplace harassment and employment discrimination.

The Hartford NLRB office filed a complaint of unlawful dismissal of Mrs. Dawn 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. Dawn besides revising their unlawful provisions in their handbook.

The Oiler v. Winn-Dixie Louisiana, Inc. case, we are introduced to Peter Oiler who worked for 20 years at Winn-Dixie, a top Fortune 500 company with more than 1,100 grocery stores in 14 Southern states. In 1999, he told his supervisors that he is a cross-dresses off the job, he was fired.

R.L. Johnson accuses Goodyear of discrimination on him and other r black employees at the Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company plant in Houston, Texas. Johnson sought transfer within the company and denied that transfer due to certain requirements. Mr. Johnson felt as though some of the requirement in placed for the transfer was implementing to those of the black race. Reason being is that Mr. Johnson and other black were hired under the labor department. If any hire that was hired by the labor department they had to meet certain qualifications to be considered for that transfer. The qualifications were above the requirement for those hired under the labor department. The courts concluded that the qualification needs to transfer from 1957 and July 2, 1965, were victims of proscribed conduct by Goodyear. However, Mr. Johnson was not hired in those years, he was hired in 1944. The court concluded that Goodyear did not discriminate against him but possible others. Goodyear since then has made changes to their transfer policies and tries to implement fair qualifications.

The process of following a case according to court rules is known as litigation. In the current American workplace there many disputes which cannot go an ignored, it is evident that compassion and common sense in the workplace has been replaced. Employees, business managers and any other person in the workplace should importantly abide by all laws and regulations to protect the organization. It is unlawful as well as immoral to deny a person opportunity basing on his race, sexual orientation and colour. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has to act within their mandate. The Human Resource Department should facilitate this by setting up a structured net in which these laws will be enforced in the workplace to ensure the safety,

The legal issues in this case stem from a lawsuit filed by former Champion Jogbra employee, Linda Dillon. She accused her former employer of wrongful termination. She believed the company breached the implied contract and terminated her services without abiding by its progressive discipline policy as outlined in the company handbook. But, according to Walsh (2010, p. 589), “the first page of the manual states; the policies and procedures contained in this manual constitute guidelines only. They do not constitute part of an employment contract, nor are they intended to make any

Paul Morel, a former employee of Baxter Heaton, LLP, has brought suit against his former employer for sexual harassment and hostile work environment under 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a). The defendant, Baxter Heaton, respectfully requests the court to grant summary judgment against Morel. A reasonable employee would not have perceived the work environment to be hostile and Morel himself did not perceive the environment to be hostile. Also, Morel cannot impute his co-worker’s conduct to the firm because the firm was not negligent in handling the matter.

While discrimination in the workplace based on sex, race, national origin, and other such characteristics can certainly lead to wrongful termination, those types of claims are usually classified as a separate legal topic known as Title VII law (because they are based on protections found in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964). Companies may not terminate their employee because of their nationality, color, race, gender, religion, age, disability, or pregnancy. For the most part, companies have policies set up to which they must abide to when wanting to terminate an employee. The employment status of the employee

In the case of Blanton v Newton Associates, Inc., Blanton’s was clearly harassed. In cases such as this, the employer (Newton) would find their best defense in the cases of Burlington Industustries, Inc. v Ellerth, 118 S. Ct. 2257 (1998), and Faragher v City of Boca Raton, 118 S. Ct. 2257 (1998).

The idea of employee rights involves many complex issues. An employee’s right to a workplace free of discrimination and harmful environmental factors is obvious. Yet, other issues surrounding privacy, personal expression, and communication monitoring are not

A perfect comedy show that I chose is called Workaholics, it’s based off three main characters named Blake Anderson, Adam DeVine, and Anders Holm. The characters met in college and after dropping out they decided to move in together and continued to act as if they are still in college, such as doing pranks, binge drinking and throwing parties at their house. From a functionalist perspective, their harmonious relationship that share the same norms would be an example of social cohesion. Additionally, they work in a small cubicle office at a telemarketing place, but with their disruptive behavior they cause a lot of trouble with their coworkers and boss.

This report reviews and analyzes individual rights afforded by the constitution and their applicability to the suit for wrongful termination in the case of Korb versus Raytheon. The specific constitutional rights under review are the freedom of speech, freedom of information and challenges associated with employment law. Lawrence Korb, a former Assistant Secretary of Defense and current employee of Raytheon, a large equipment manufacturing company for the U.S. military was terminated after making public statements criticizing defense spending and calling for a reduction of Navy’s fleet. Raytheon, a manufacturer of

Employment-at-will is a law that stipulate that as long as a employee is not been discriminated he or she can loose their job and any given time. This paper aims to analyze 8 different scenarios and determine whatever or not an employ can lose his or her job based in some behaviors, actions, or inactions that had lead to a somewhat hostile, aggressive, and even disrespectful work environment. At the same time the paper will address the importance of whistleblower police for any organization. While the employment-at-will allows employers to terminate their staff at any moment, at the same time it protect the staff from any type of discrimination.

Employees are said to depict positive behaviors like innovative behavior and OCB when the individuals feel the support of the organization, i.e., perceived organizational support (POS) and negative behaviors like CWB in a non-supportive organization (Scheuer, 2010). From this perspective the workplace deviance can be triggered with respect to the unfavorable or unsupportive working conditions. (Colbert, Mount, Harter, Barrick, & Witt, 2004). Thus this leads to the organizational context that has to be taken into account in deviance research (Bennett, Aquino, Reed & Thau, 2005). Even leader behaviors are said to influence the perception of the organizational climate (Lewin, Lippitt & White, 1939). Effectiveness within the organization builds up a trusting relationship between the leader and the sub-ordinates that will have positive consequences. When the employee perception of organization related factors are taken into account organizational injustice has been a frequently cited cause of misconduct.