Treaux Manufacturing Memo

The PDF file name indicates the handbook was published on September 24, 2015. Primary sections of the handbook include Employment, Employment Relations and Communications, Compensation and Benefits, Leaves and Absences, Complaints and Grievances, Employee Conduct and Welfare, General Procedures, and Termination of Employment. The handbook provides a summary of policies fully outlined in the district’s Board Policy Manual. The content in the policy manual is derived from “state and federal laws, case law, Attorney General opinions, State Board of Education Rules, governmental regulations, and local requirements of the District” (Del Valle Independent School District, 2015, pg.

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

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.

Bernardin & Russell (2013) indicate that company policies should be reviewed prior to terminating an employee. Terminating Jeannette Lewis would not be advised to due the risk of litigation related to the violation of procedures outlined in the disciplinary policy (Pedersen, 2008). According to Pedersen (2008), “Handbooks often serve to shape employee expectations about disciplinary procedures and job security, and thus many courts have found them to be binding under an implied contract theory. As Paul Berks summarizes, ‘‘[u]nder the ‘handbook exception,’ an employer could unwittingly limit his ability to terminate an employee by disseminating a handbook that granted to employees the rights on the job beyond those traditionally recognized

They said it was due to compliance, but no evidence was provided to me that day for the nature of compliance I have not met. They said that I wasn’t meeting compliance and I was not adequate for their company. I believe my termination was something all my managers were looking forward to and they had to find by all means, a reason to support their decision. Anyway, the attitude of management toward me was unbearable and I feared my work environment. I noticed my direct supervisor Richard Fikani, was nicer and helpful toward me at first when I started working there, but for some reason his attitude changed toward me and he was not willing to help me anymore, and he had intentionally undone some of the work I have done properly. My peers have made more complicated compliance matters than I had done, but they were never sanctioned for it. After they stated the reason for my termination, they would not let me go to my desk to get my belongings, and they went to get my belonging for me and made me exit buy the back door. There are some of my peers that unperformed in comparison to me but they were never fired. I was the only one fired that

I am writing to you regarding my termination on Friday, February 24th. i believe that my termination was unfair and unjustified. I understand they believe i failed to pass probation, however all of the incidents in my file are unjustifiable. The reasons for my termination are as follows:

In many cases, employee handbooks do constitute valid employment contracts, especially if the handbook guarantees a particular salary, a minimum period of employment, regular job evaluations, or disciplinary, grievance, or termination proceedings. In such instances, it is difficult to terminate an employee without following the written procedures. In addition, promises of job reviews, raises, training, and promotions can also be binding, so should be avoided by the employer. Employers

1) There are several processes involved in a wrongful discharge. This is a fairly new and quickly expanding area that involves litigation, and this is an area that employers would rather avoid. About 65%-70% of worker’s are thought to be employees at will which means that an employer may fire an employee at any time for any reason, as long as the reason is lawful (Kavaler & Spiegel, 2003, p. 57). In order to avoid litigation employers push for arbitration to assist in settling cases. State laws determine if arbitration is allowed (Kavaler & Spiegel, 2003, p. 58). The risk management director will explore

Thank you for your letter of 06/28/17 in which you demand $50,000.00 for a Section 32 settlement of the matter subject to a Medicare set-aside.

In addition, I think you have brought to light a policy, while it doesn’t occur very often, that needs to be reassessed. I will be holding a meeting with management to

I am writing to express my sincere interest in a Summer Associate position at Orrick’s Sacramento office. Spending another summer as a member of the Orrick legal team would be a remarkable opportunity to continue my development as an aspiring litigator, and to build upon the knowledge that I have gained during the 2015 Summer Associate program. I am particularly interested in continuing my legal career with Orrick because of the opportunities for professional growth that the firm provides, and the overwhelmingly positive culture. I am a strong candidate for this position as a result of my academic achievements, and because I personally espouse the core values that uphold Orrick’s unique culture.

Should you have any questions about this letter, please feel free to give me a call.

Please accept this letter as my response to your letter of September 23, 2015 as well as my formal demand to retract the defamatory statements that were made in your letter.

I am writing you this e-mail under the instruction of my lawyer in regard to our Family Law matter currently before Superior Court.

Thank you for your prompt response to my, complain made on December 26, 2015. Regarding to the obscene gestures made by the son of the Jimenez’s family towards my wife and my staff. As you requested me to assist to a meeting, where I was blamed with unsubstantiated indictments, and where I was threated from Mr. Jimenez. We are satisfied with your fair judgment, and the way you handle the situation. At the same time I like personally thank you for be patient with my company, and for always being a reasonable person.