Sara Lee Foods Case Summary

We hold that a franchisor may be subject to vicarious liability for the tortuous conduct of its franchisee only if the franchisor had control or a right of control over the daily operation of the specific aspect of the franchisee’s business that is alleged to *135 have caused the harm. Because Arby’s did not have control or a right of control over DRI’s supervision of its employees, there was no master/servant relationship between Arby’s and DRI for purposes of the plaintiffs’ respondeat superior claim against Arby’s. Arby’s cannot be held vicariously liable for DRI’s negligent supervision of Pierce.

STATEMENT OF FACTS: Sheila White interviewed with Marvin Brown and obtained a job as a “track laborer” with Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Company. Shortly after her hire date, however, she assumed forklift operator duties. This new assignment still fell under the “track laborer” position description, and White occasionally performed those duties although her primary responsibility was operating the forklift. Three months into her new job, White complained to the company that her immediate supervisor was sexually harassing her on the job. He was temporarily suspended and required to attend sexual harassment training. White was then informed that she was being reassigned to track labor duties only. White

While employed at the Hershey Chocolate USA, Turners claims have been essential accommodation on defendant. In this case the looking the material facts in the light most favorable to the Turner, it is difficult to conclude the material of the law, based on the evidence that Turners directly threaten to its employees or place an “Undue hardship” on Hershey. Therefore, the question whether Turners can perform the essential function of her position with reasonable accommodation is an open material fact for trial. Hershey will have a opportunities at trial to defeat Turners claim by presenting that her proposed accommodation would make vulnerable the health safety of its employees therefore an employer is not requires to accommodate an employee. Moreover, According to Buskirk, 307 F.3d at 168 case that it would carry out an undue hardship that even with the accommodation Turner would still be unable to perform work on lines 8 and 9. This matter should be used by a jury based upon fully developed evidence

There may be other details in this case that are not mentioned in the article that would go into the decision-making of the hospital whether or not to fire Carla. As the reader, we do not know if there were other negative situations that Carla was put in before this incident. We do not know if Carla was a bad influence to the hospital or if she had been written up several times before this incident. If Carla had been a troublemaker to the hospital before, it could lead the hospital to fire her that much more. If Carla had good reviews, this

Marcus Ashmore and Terrell Lee Green were maintenance workers for J.P. Thayer Co., Inc. under supervisor Gene Fye. After a particular incident of harassment on January 16, 2001, Plaintiffs reported Fye to Tricia Johnson, the Assistant Property Manager. At this time, Johnson did nothing about the complaint. The harassment continued, and on January 26, Plaintiffs complained to the Property Manager, Mary Frances de Rivera. In response, de Rivera verbally reprimanded Fye. This, however, did not stop Fye’s harassment. Instead of reporting the behavior to Defendant, Plaintiffs hired an attorney who wrote a letter to Defendant saying that Ashmore and Green were going to file charges of discrimination with the EEOC. On February 22, Fye was fired by Defendant. This came three days after getting the letter and about a month after the initial harassment complaints.

An employer is liable for the actions of his employee unless they fall outside the scope of employment. Williams v. Community Drive-In Theater, Inc., 520 P.2d 1296, [p. 1297] (Kan. 1974). To fall inside the scope, the employee’s actions must (1) arise naturally from the course of their jobs and (2) intend to further employer’s interest and not done for personal reasons. Daugherty v. Allee’s Sports Bar & Grill, 260 S.W.3d 869, [p. 873] (Mo. Ct. App. 2008).

According to the article, a fast-food worker was disciplined for poor pickle placement. An employee was fired because the pickles were arranged in a triangle and not in a square on the patty. The case according to the article was that of an administrative law judge who considered the suspension and termination of an employee who worked part time for a labor union and had previously struck other fast food establishments over raising the minimum wage. The judge concluded that the employee's suspension was discriminated against her for engaging in protected union activity. Even though the defendant admitted that she did not put pickles on her sandwiches in perfect squares as she was required, because of the written warning she received. The company

To begin, Teddy’s has been found guilty of sexual harassment by the New Jersey Commission of Human Rights. Ms. Pollard has been awarded back wages and damages. In response, Teddy’s has appealed to the Circuit Court, and the original decision was overturned and Teddy’s was asked to provide Ms. Pollard with her old job. Ms. Pollard has appealed that decision. With that being said, I believe that Teddy’s can be held liable on several items. Ms. Pollard claims she was the victim of sexual harassment and gender discrimination.

After hearing some of the family members, Jerome become fearful that he would lose the case if the families were allowed to testify. Some of the workers at the plant revealed that some chemicals had been dumped into the ground, however some of the foreman’s withheld information and lied early in the case. Further discovery showed that a significant amount of chemicals had been disposed of directly into the ground. Jan deposed John Riley, owner of the Riley Tannery, who denied using TCE and denied any knowledge of polluting of land around the factory. Dispositions of other townspeople showed that dumping had taken place for years on the land that Riley owned, but Jan was not able to uncover much of anything

A large percent of Chick fil-a is located in malls with a gross sales revenue of between 4.4 Million- 5.35 million

It is not my recommendation that ABC wait for the EEOC to perform investigation and file suit against the company. In recent history these proceedings become public affairs and will reflect poorly on ABC and its management regardless of the court’s ruling. ABC’s management should begin mediation with David to prevent suit being filed with the goal of settlement outside of court with ABC’s remedial options including:

Herbalife is an American corporation that creates, markets, and sells nutritional supplements. The corporation’s business configuration utilizes independent contractors who earn profits though a multi-level marketing compensation structure. In 2016, the Federal Trade Commission filed a complaint against Herbalife, accusing the international brand of using deceptive business practices. The FTC claimed that Herbalife mislead consumers about how much profit they could actually make by selling the brand, and added that “most Herbalife distributors make no money at all”. Rather than dubbing Herbalife a pyramid scheme, the FTC allowed the company to continue operations but ordered it to pay $200 million in compensatory damages, to be distributed

Buying: is when retailers purchase a large quantity of the product while it’s available at a lower price–to-retailer (PTR). It is somehow problematic because retailers could either raise the price-to-customer (PTC) back to the regular price level after the intended period of the promotion and pocket the difference, or they could continue to sell the product at a lower PTC beyond the intended period and thereby condition customers to expect prices to remain lower.

This writer will be discussing a case where a male employee files a sexual harassment claim against the employer as the male employee identifies as being gay. He also is filing discrimination on the basis of his gender and alleges retaliation as he was terminated after he had complained about his female coworker. Apparently, the male employee alleged that a female employee while at a dinner and concert after work hours grabbed his privates. It is important to note that the male employee’s performance prior to the incident was declining and was counseled on several occasions by his employer about his declining production. Furthermore, this writer will be discussing whether if the facts could result in liability to the employer for sexual harassment or gender discrimination. Also, this writer will be integrating and referring to various sources and cases that

The Superior Foods Case Study discusses the challenges leadership are faced with regarding their corporation and their employees. The challenge this corporation is faced involves the beef contamination of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (mad cow disease). “On December 23, 2011, the U.S. Department of Agriculture has announced that bovine spongiform encephalopathy had been discovered in a Holstein cow in Washington State” (O’Sullivan, 2004). This outbreak caused a global reaction from the eight countries and the meat processing plants that were a part of the Superior Food Corporations. The leaders of this corporation had to develop strategies to prevent the contamination from spreading, and strategies to keep the organization from being affected financially. This case study was a good example of what typically occurs when meat processing plants are faced issues due to contamination.