The internal auditors questioned why the two shipments were done before December 31, since the requested dates were in the following year. The shipments had a total value of $150,000.00. Another concern for the internal auditors was that there was no written agreement with United Thermostatic Controls to accept the early shipments and pay for them before they actually needed the merchandise. The internal auditors also discovered that Frank Campbell put pressure on the accountants to record the shipments to show the sales. Their concerns were discussed with
Legal Encounter #1: At the time Newcorp provides Pat Grey with a 30 day notice to lay off with severance pay, the reason for such decision is not fully established. Here is my analysis: From Pat Grey's perspective: Pat Grey may feel that he is being wrongfully terminated because of two reasons: 1.He took an unpopular stance at the local school board meeting. 2.Newcorp has not provided Pat with a Performance Review to determine whether or not Pat has done his job. If he failed to do so, he felt that there should have been a Plan, as well as a warning before a termination takes place. If these two components can be proven, then there is a wrongful termination case because Newcorp breaches the contract.
Unquestionably, the decision to change the schedule of production staff was made by managers and directors with no direct knowledge of, and perhaps without consideration of, any employee’s religious affiliation or needs. Based on Walker Toy Company’s policies and procedures to comply with EEOC guidelines, a reasonable person may also agree that management felt this was not an important consideration, as they could have easily made accommodations in line with Title VII if Mrs. Miller had made her needs known. The reasonable person test is pervasive in case law as a factor in determining whether the employee’s resignation was reasonable. The case of Barrow v. New Orleans Steamship Ass’n (1994), established that certain factors are significant in determining constructive discharge: “(1) demotion; (2) reduction in salary; (3) reduction in job responsibilities; (4) reassignment to menial or degrading work; (5) reassignment to work under a younger supervisor; (6) badgering, harassment, or humiliation by the employer calculated to encourage the employee's resignation; or (7) offers of early retirement on terms that would make the employee worse off, whether accepted or not." This case supports my recommendation to litigate because Mrs. Miller was not subjected to any of these tactics, nor does she make any claims that any of these tactics were used toward her.
Nothing will happen to Mary. The employee who wrote the letter might lose their job from misinformation provided by Mary to CEO. The stockholders will lose money from the investment into the company. CEO will know truth. Joe might lose job for being insubordinate to Mary.
Evidence showed that she had several promotions while being employed and that her job performance were averages. The court did not hold the Paper Magic Group liable because the plaintiff could not provide adequate evidence of age discrimination. A case similar to ours, Goldmeier v. Allstate refers to constructive discharge regarding religious beliefs. The plaintiffs claim that Allstate violated their religious beliefs after the company announced that offices would remain open Friday evening and Saturday mornings (Goldmeier, 2003). Evidence showed that Allstate offered the plaintiff’s time to observe their holy day but they would have to work another day.
It became harder for the supervisors to keep track of their employees, therefore, making it difficult for the payroll department to deduct pay for the time the employees were late. Nine months after the removal of the time clocks, it was decided to re-introduce the time clocks. This decision stemmed from the lack of attendance, poor production,
| Cost Club | Memo To: | Pat Sutton | From: | Leonna Whitfield | | | Date: | June 23, 2015 | Re: | Human Resource Issues | | | Discharges at the Anderson Cost Club Store Pat, since the Anderson Cost Club Store is located in a right-to-work state, the general manager was justified in not giving the employees a reason for being discharged. There is no evidence of any broken labor laws or violation of employee rights on behalf of the general manager. In a right-to-work state, an at-will employee can be terminated at any time and without notice; as long as the discharge is not for reasons of discrimination, intimidation, retaliation, or breach of contract. There have been no formal complaints about any unethical treatment or violations from the discharged employees. Since this particular store is located in a right-to-work state, I can assume that the discharged employees signed an at-will-employment agreement which notifies them of the company’s right to terminate their employment without notice.
This consistency, however, does not require that the Employer must administer the exact same level of disciplinary action specified in the Standards of Conduct the same way in each and every instance. Each instance of violation of the Standards turns on its own facts and distinguishing variables such as, prior disciplinary history, length of time since the last discipline and mitigating or aggravating circumstances. However, the Standards of Conduct are designed to impose progressive discipline in either of the two tracks of violations mentioned previously (attendance or performance based). In other words, if an employee has previously been disciplined for a first offense violation in one of the tracks and is now faced with a second violation (for a different rule violation), the penalty for the second violation of the standard for which just cause is presently found will be imposed. In those instances where there is choice or a range of penalties, issues of mitigation or aggravation shall determine the penalty.
Assumptions • Mike Frazer wants the system implemented in 10 weeks because he views it as the answer to the company’s lackluster follow up sales. The team has not yet asked for an extension or increased budget. • Finley claims he overreacted at Johnston due to lack of sleep from working on the project. He is also skeptical of the projects actual completion date. • Phillips left the company because she was interested in a better quality of life, even if it results in a pay cut.
The company was unable to maintain and manage the bonus incentive plan that they had in place before the crisis. The employees started to complain about the company’s policies and its situation also by underperforming, which in turn leads to low productivity. The manager Ron Bent had to figure out a way to address these problems, and come up with solutions so that the company can continue operating and supplying its clients. PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION Engstrom Auto Mirror Plant was facing the problem of not being able to keep their employees motivated in both good and bad times. The bonuses were perceived as being part of their regular paycheck, not rewards for high performance, which in long-term lead to de-motivation.