A person RS is working as a traveling salesperson for a person AW. The sales of RS constituted ninety-percent of RS work time. The person RS works 50 hours per week but was not paid for the extra hours. The new supervisor CB has claimed that the person RS has been inflating the sales call which is reported and should submit to a polygraph test. The personRS reported the polygraph test request to the U.S Department of labor which has prohibited the test. The person RS submitted a letter from his wife’s physician to the person AW which stated that she is ill and is in need of daily care. RS is taking leave of several months to take care of his wife. The person AW has sixty-three employees at the time. The person RS was terminated from his position as the position was merged with the adjacent territory. To find: The reinstating of RS under key employee exception by AW. Explanation: A key employee is one who has major ownership or decision making role in the business. In the above case, RS is considered as a key employee as he constituted ninety percent of work time sale. According to FMLA, employees are allowed to take time off from work for family or medical reasons. FMLA provides unpaid leave of twelve weeks within a period of twelve-month. The wife of RS got injured after falling from a ladder and he took leave until December 2018 to take care of his wife. AW had eliminated RS from his position and combined his sales territory with an adjacent territory. Under FMLA act, the job of RS is not protected. Thus, the person AW can avoid reinstating the person RS.

Question

Tyrone, a U.S. citizen, works for U.S. Oil at its production plant in Iraq. Tyrone has been with U.S. Oil for fifteen years and has always received excellent evaluations. Tyrone applies for a promotion with U.S. Oil to a supervisory role but is not hired for the position. The person hired for the position has been with the company for only two years and is much younger than Tyrone, who is forty-five. Can Tyrone sue U.S. Oil under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, even though he is not working within the United States? a)Yes, Tyrone can, because employees working abroad for U.S. employers are protected under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. b) No, Tyrone can’t, because any lawsuit brought by Tyrone would have to be under Iraqi law. c) No, Tyrone can’t, because employees working abroad for U.S. employers are not protected under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act.

Answer 1

Question

Chapter 20, Problem 4RE

Summary Introduction

Case summary: A person RS is working as a traveling salesperson for a person AW. The sales of RS constituted ninety-percent of RS work time. The person RS works 50 hours per week but was not paid for the extra hours. The new supervisor CB has claimed that the person RS has been inflating the sales call which is reported and should submit to a polygraph test. The personRS reported the polygraph test request to the U.S Department of labor which has prohibited the test. The person RS submitted a letter from his wife’s physician to the person AW which stated that she is ill and is in need of daily care. RS is taking leave of several months to take care of his wife. The person AW has sixty-three employees at the time. The person RS was terminated from his position as the position was merged with the adjacent territory.

To find:The reinstating of RS under key employee exception by AW.

Explanation:

A key employee is one who has major ownership or decision making role in the business. In the above case, RS is considered as a key employee as he constituted ninety percent of work time sale. According to FMLA, employees are allowed to take time off from work for family or medical reasons. FMLA provides unpaid leave of twelve weeks within a period of twelve-month. The wife of RS got injured after falling from a ladder and he took leave until December 2018 to take care of his wife. AW had eliminated RS from his position and combined his sales territory with an adjacent territory. Under FMLA act, the job of RS is not protected. Thus, the person AW can avoid reinstating the person RS.

Expert Solution & Answer

Trending nowThis is a popular solution!

See solution

Check out sample textbook solution

Students have asked these similar questions

Tyrone, a U.S. citizen, works for U.S. Oil at its production plant in Iraq. Tyrone has been with U.S. Oil for fifteen years and has always received excellent evaluations. Tyrone applies for a promotion with U.S. Oil to a supervisory role but is not hired for the position. The person hired for the position has been with the company for only two years and is much younger than Tyrone, who is forty-five. Can Tyrone sue U.S. Oil under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, even though he is not working within the United States? a)Yes, Tyrone can, because employees working abroad for U.S. employers are protected under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. b) No, Tyrone can’t, because any lawsuit brought by Tyrone would have to be under Iraqi law. c) No, Tyrone can’t, because employees working abroad for U.S. employers are not protected under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act.

Mohamed Arafi, a naturalized U.S. citizen from Morocco, works as a valet dry cleaner for the Mandarin Oriental Hotel in Washington, D.C. In December 2010, a supervisor allegedly prohibited Arab or Muslim workers from going on floors occupied by a delegation of Israeli diplomats. The supervisor allegedly told Arafi, “You know how the Israelis are with Arabs and Muslims.” Arafi says he complied with his supervisor’s instructions but consequently lost out on tips. He subsequently complained to another supervisor and the hotel’s director of human resources. Arafi says his work hours were cut, and that his colleagues said demeaning things about Muslims to him after the incident became known to them. Arafi brought suit under Title VII, alleging disparate treatment resulting in an adverse employment action (the loss of tips), as well as retaliation. The Mandarin Hotel claimed a national security exemption. Would either of Arafi’s claims be successful? Would the Hotel’s? [Arafi v. Mandarin…

Interactive Data Corp. hired Abdullah as an assistant product manager at a starting salary of $18,500. Over the next six years, Interactive steadily promoted Abdullah until he became Los Angeles branch manager at a salary of $56,116. Interactive’s officers repeatedly told Abdullah that he would have his job as long as his performance was adequate. In addition, Interactive distributed an employee handbook that specified “termination guidelines,” including a mandatory seven-step pre-termination procedure. Two years later, abdullah learned that his recently hired supervisor, Nargis, was under investigation by the FBI for embezzlement at his previous job. Abdullah reported this to Interactive officers. Shortly thereafter, Interactive fired Abdullah. He sued, claiming that Interactive could fire him only for good cause, after the seven-step procedure. Valid contract Criteria : ( Offer, Acceptance, Consideration, Legality, Capacity, Consent, Writing) A). What possible information and…